1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Worth going from Samsung F1 to F3?

Discussion in 'Storage' started by KieranD, Dec 2, 2009.

  1. KieranD

    KieranD

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    8,003 (3.17/day)
    Thanks Received:
    813
    Location:
    Glasgow, Scotland
    Currently i have a Samsung F1 750gb 32mb cache and a refurb Seagate 500gb 7200.11 32mb cache All the Seagate is used for is backup nothing else, i planned to use it for linux also but i never did.

    So all i wanted to know was the F3 worth the upgrade over the F1?

    I would be either going to sell both drives i currently have for a 1TB F3 or going to sell the Seagate, get a 500gb F3 and keep the F1 for backup.

    If its not worth the upgrade i wont bother.

    Its also particularly good for me to know how good the F3's are because i may need a drive for my mates build in January.
  2. KieranD

    KieranD

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    8,003 (3.17/day)
    Thanks Received:
    813
    Location:
    Glasgow, Scotland
    is there any benefits of the F3 over the F1? like platters or speeds or power usage?
    the F2 is that slower green drive that uses less power right?
  3. Asylum

    Asylum

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    2,786 (1.27/day)
    Thanks Received:
    660
    Location:
    South Carolina
    I would say the benifits would be minimal.
    Not worth the trouble and the cost if you ask me.
    Save up for a SSD. There prices should be coming down shortly.
  4. crazyeyesreaper

    crazyeyesreaper Chief Broken Rig

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Messages:
    8,126 (4.20/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,742
    Location:
    04578
    i got a 1 terabyte F1 and a 1 terabyte F3

    my F3 is faster on average quieter less noise etc other then that in a day to day setting there not noticeable in there differences when doing anything so if u can save for a decent SSD go ahead or a raid setup but other then that yea stick with what u got
  5. BababooeyHTJ New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Messages:
    907 (0.47/day)
    Thanks Received:
    85
    The benches that I have seen for the F3 are damn impressive. I wouldn't mind picking up a couple of 500GB F3s for Raid0.

    1TB SSDs are coming down in price shortly? I didn't know that.
  6. DrPepper

    DrPepper The Doctor is in the house

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Messages:
    7,483 (3.16/day)
    Thanks Received:
    813
    Location:
    Scotland (It rains alot)
    Not really worth the bother my 1tb is an f3 and I never noticed a difference. Get it if you have the money to spare but I'd rather get a SSD.
  7. KieranD

    KieranD

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    8,003 (3.17/day)
    Thanks Received:
    813
    Location:
    Glasgow, Scotland
    dont like the price to capacity ratio at all for the SSD's

    i think i might just leave it then until i see an F3 on sale or something
  8. DrPepper

    DrPepper The Doctor is in the house

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Messages:
    7,483 (3.16/day)
    Thanks Received:
    813
    Location:
    Scotland (It rains alot)
    I didn't think they were worth the money but they are. I'd buy an SSD over a HDD.
  9. DirectorC

    DirectorC New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2009
    Messages:
    1,624 (0.95/day)
    Thanks Received:
    267
    Location:
    Florizy
    With SSDs you shouldn't figure price to capacity ratio. What matters is that it will make all file operations way faster and application loading nearly instant. I am going for dual Corsair Extreme series 32GBs in RAID0 when I have the $300. Speed wise, it's better than any CPU/GPU/RAM upgrade you could hope for and worth every penny.

    Now if it's raw storage you need, clearly SSDs are out of place in the discussion.
  10. v12dock

    v12dock

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2008
    Messages:
    1,538 (0.76/day)
    Thanks Received:
    297
    My buddy has 2 500gb F3s in RAID 0 got 290mb/s read and write out of them
  11. DrPepper

    DrPepper The Doctor is in the house

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Messages:
    7,483 (3.16/day)
    Thanks Received:
    813
    Location:
    Scotland (It rains alot)
    It's not the read speed thats important its the random IO that is its greatest advantage.
  12. KieranD

    KieranD

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    8,003 (3.17/day)
    Thanks Received:
    813
    Location:
    Glasgow, Scotland
    The speed of an SSD means nothing to me as i dont think that i need the speed boost. I hardly notice speed of the hard drive unless im transferring files. Load times dont bother me. SSD's to me yeah you get a nice speed boost but 64gb or 128gb whatever it is just isnt enough space. Im not paying a premium to just have an SSD for OS and a few regular played games.

    This was all about noise, power consumption, reliability (my first F1 died on me this ones lasted so far), slightly improved transfer speeds, the possibility of having 1 drive over 2 or having a better backup drive.

    Im not buying SSD till its reasonably priced per gb because its not like hard drives arnt good enough for todays world. Im just an average user nothing special, im not one of those people who went and bought raptor drives for my games.

    Yeah its more like storage i need, ill be honest if i could afford an SSD id get one but i cant, the idea was like sell a drive and put it towards a new one.
  13. MN12BIRD

    MN12BIRD

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2009
    Messages:
    471 (0.24/day)
    Thanks Received:
    78
    I would rather have 2 hard drives over 1 anyway. I think your setup now is pretty decent. Not really worth ditching a 750GB HD just to get a 1TB even if it is a little faster or quieter.

    I love my drive setup. 1x 160GB for my OS and all my programs and the 500GB for all the music, movies, backups etc. This just makes sense to me. When one drive goes I still have either a working OS and all my programs, or better yet I still have all my precious movies and music! I wouldn't want to put everything onto one drive that gets used more and if it dies I loose everything! For example my 160GB holds temp video files when I'm editing so it gets worked harder than the 500GB that only runs media. Why would I want to put everything onto one HD that would get used harder? Also I think its a bit faster to have OS and system files on one HD and the Page file and media on another. I mean I can play a game like Crysis off the main HD and save a FRAPS video to the second at the same time. I think that might be smoother than doing both off one HD at once while also once again being easier on the drives. I could be wrong and it might be something that isn't really noticeable but I just feel like its a better setup than having only one HD.

    Keep what you have until you need more space.

    SSD is nice if you can afford it for an OS drive. But once again you would still need (well most of us) a big storage drive to go with it. Right now a 1.5TB HD is the best bang for the buck in storage.
    KieranD says thanks.
  14. KieranD

    KieranD

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    8,003 (3.17/day)
    Thanks Received:
    813
    Location:
    Glasgow, Scotland
    Maybe its faster to run an OS and main programs on a main drive and use the other as backup; keep save games and media on one drive anything else that needs a backup thats what i was intending to do, i dunno i want to really change this Seagate but its not so bad as i would complain or anything. Im thinking of ditching the Seagate and getting an F3 as my main drive and the F1 as backup.

    I keep all my work for college on a flash drive its all backup on the college network, god help me if i lose that drive and have no backup.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page