Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 320GB

Throughout all of our benchmarks regardless of what we are reviewing, testing is done in a clean and stand-alone version of Windows XP Professional with SP2. Prior to testing, these conditions are met:

• Desktop and scrap files are cleaned up, including emptying of recycle bin.
• No virus scanner or firewall is installed in the stand-alone installation.
• The stand-alone installation drive is completely defragged using Diskeeper 10 Pro Premier.
• All unnecessary programs are closed, so that Windows should have no more than 15 active processes running.
• Computer has proper airflow.

If you are interested in using the same benchmarks as us, feel free to visit the developers website:

• HD Tach RW 3
• HD Tune 2.52
• PC Mark 2005
• Sandra 2007

The testing rig used for today’s benchmarking is as follows:

• CPU: AMD Windsor 4600+ EE @ 2.4GHz – 2.85GHz
• Motherboard: ASUS M2N32-SLI Deluxe (701 BIOS)
• Memory: OCZ VX2 2GB PC2-8000 Ti Alpha
• Video: ASUS 7800GT TOP
• Sound: Onboard HD Audio
• Storage: Seagate 7200.9 320GB
• Etcetera: Windows XP Professional w/ SP2, NVIDIA 81.98 Drivers
• Cooling: Corsair Nautilus 500

I will be comparing this 320GB drive to the previously reviewed 500GB Seagate 7200.9 drive. Now, there will be differences between the two drives in the tests, because the 320GB is a newer 7200.10 model. Still, this is a comparison between a $95 drive and a $260 one. Things should be interesting!

As expected, the 320GB cleaned up here, but even moreso than I expected in the average read tests. The 7200.10 drive scored a full 14MB/s better then the 500GB. Impressive… that’s a 21% increase. Nothing to scoff at, for sure.

Here is where differences between HD Tach and HD Tune become evident. The results varied quite a bit in the previous test, but here they are so close it’s scary. All of the read tests were -identical- to one another, but started to sway a bit with the Latency and Burst. It wouldn’t even be right to conclude a winner here… they are the same.

The exact same goes for our Sandra and PC Mark tests. The only thing that proved different was the PC Mark score, a mere 0.05% difference.