HD speed vs Processor

What kinds of tasks are more affected by the HD speed (rpm), and what by the processor?

Would you, e.g., spend $300 (say) more for one higher level of processor, or $30 (say) more for one higher level of Hard Drive speed?

 

As an example, if you use Photoshop and create large image files, the rule of thumb is to have 5x the amount of available file size. If you have 2 gigs of memory and Photoshop will only look at at 1.7 gigs max, as an example, this means that if you're working with a 400 meg file (not uncommon when working with a high res medium or large format scan) then ideally you'd want 2 gigs of available memory or more. If the requirements 'overflow' the memory of your machine then a 'scratchdisk' handles the processing and the faster the operating speed of the scratchdisk, the faster the processing will be completed.

The reality is that most requirements aren't as specialized as Photoshop or other image processing programs. But if you're going to ever consider editing high definition video, then both a fast processor and hard drive, and as much memory as you can afford, are desirable. I'd suggest going with all, if possible.

The downside is the faster processor and hard drive will likely affect operating time when running on the internal battery.

 

$30 for a better hard drive.

A processor that runs at 2.0 GHz isn't much slower than a processor running 2.16 GHz...you probably wouldn't notice it unless you had a faster notebook running right beside you. Any Core 2 Duo processor right now is already very powerful, and the few MHz difference between each processor isn't much.

A faster hard drive doesn't change that much either. It will help in video editing, but in normal tasks you'll probably open an application two seconds faster. 7200 RPM isn't too significant over 5400 RPM.

That said, if you must upgrade something, I'd say upgrade the hard drive speed. The $300 for a processor bump isn't worth it in my opinion. But personally I don't think you need to upgrade your hard drive speed or processor unless you really want to.

I'd suggest upgrading RAM though. Not sure if you have 2 GB RAM, but if you don't, get 2 GB RAM. That will benefit you more than a processor upgrade or a hard drive upgrade will.

 

Hard drive. Look at my sig, should be obvious

This came from the simple observation with my previous machine that I never wait for the CPU, but I do wait a lot on the HD. I always have an eye on Task Manager so whenever I find myself waiting for the computer, I look at the CPU usage and the HD light. 95% of the time, it's the HD light that's on and the CPU not being used.

 

Thanks a ton for the prompt replies! All your answers are very helpful and enlightening!

 

One word of warning: Model. There are at least 6 different model lines of 7200 RPM notebook hard drives out there, so I would suggest if you want the best to go with the newest models, aka, Seagate Momentus 7200.2 or the Hitachi 7K200 . Both use Perpendicular Recording technology and are very fast. I have not used either one personally so I cannot account for the noise / heat / performance of either, but hopefully someone who has either one can chime in here.

 

HD is the bottle neck, should try and get the quickest possible

 

wouldn't an increase from 2.0 to 2.16 actually be a theoretical increase of .32ghz?

 

Correct answer! And here's why...

Upgrading a C2D processor to faster MHz will only provide a 5% to 20% increase in system performance. Upgrading a laptop HDD from 5400 or 7200 rpm to a SSD will potentially provide hundreds of % in performance increase:


However, not all SSDs are created equal. Mtron's SSD is the fastest in the world, not only in sustained read/write speed but in sequential & random access speed. A HDD must physically locate data on a platter and position the actuator arm over the correct position before data can be read which translates to seek time. A SSD doesn't have any seek time, it's limited to it's IOPS & read/write speed, which is why you will notice a phenomenal speed increase in application load, file copy, boot time, shut down time, & sleep/hibernation states. Instead of upgrading from 5400 rpm to 15,000 rpm HDD and only shaving off seconds, you go from waiting to seemingly instantaneous with SSD.


Of course the performance boost isn't the only compelling reason to replace a mechanical drive, other incentives:

1. No moving parts: no vibration & no noise (totally silent)
2. Consumes 50% less power: less heat & longer battery life.
3. Lighter weight, translates to lighter laptop.
4. 1000 - 1500g operating shock.
5. Reliability & Endurance that a mechanical HDD can't provide (50% of computer failure is due to HDD failure!):
   -Write Endurance: >140 years @ 50GB write/erase per day
   -Read Endurance: Unlimited
   -Data Retention: 10 years

The only known deterrent to upgrading your HDD to SSD would be cost.

 

Yeah, but you did not mention that with SSD drive, you do not need to be worried so much about fragmented files/catalogs/free drive space. Hibernation/sleep etc can be handled by Intel Turbo Memory to speed up the OS up/down times, but since it is some kind of cache technology, it is maybe not the best alternative.

I think that the most interesting would be to use the SSD drives for "real" multitasking and with for example accessing a lot of data that can not be cached all the time; for example, you people who deal with large and complex SQL-queries (maybe even in a virtual environment with large databases) would just love to skip all unnecessary time taken by accessing the hard fragmented transaction logs and databases!

However, $30 may be enough for a faster HDD, but definitely NOT enough for SSD!

 

As much as I love Ferraris and Lamborghinis I still drive a Ford.

 

Good point that I forgot to mention. Yes, no more fragmentation and degradation of drive performance.

Too bad the Intel TurboMemory has been shown to slow boot time and system performance. So yes, not best alternative.

 

This is also a very interesting link, for you people dreaming about faster storage alternatives than crappy harddisks ;-)

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/06/07/computex_2007_memory_graphics/page8.html

Maybe it will be available as an option in T63p or T7xp models??

 

Does the 7200 RPM one decrease battery life and generate more heat

 

Adding the clock speed of two processor cores together is not correct. A dual core processor running at 2.0 GHz does not equal 4.0 GHz. Especially not true is thinking a quad core processor running at 2.0 GHz is equivalent to 8.0 GHz.

Contrary to what Worst Buy salesman tell people, dual core does not equal twice the GHz.

Just think of dual core processors as two processors doing separate work at the same clock speed. There are not many applications that use the processor cores in parallel to increase the performance right now. Even if there were such applications, it would not exactly be double the performance of one core.

 

This topic has been discussed to death. Please search the forums and Google so we don't have to beat the dead horse.

It's funny, because he apparently listens to Lenovo CSR's too. :laugh:

 

But the situation is changing, and changing fast.

 

It would be so much easier yet more helpful (and will win you appreciations) if you simply answered "Yes" or "No", rather than typing a long sentence that serves no purpose.

My guess is "yes". Am I right? It's hard to search the forums w/o a good keyword.

 

30 bucks for the HD indeed the difference between a T7300 and a T7700 is negligible.

 

The dollar amount was just an arbitrary example. Now to be more realistic, what about the following:

Processor T5500 ---> T7200 @ $150 more
versus
HD 5400 rpm ---> 7200 rpm @$60 more

 

I agree, answering would be quicker than what I'm about to tell you, but I hate to be an enabler. You think I'm a jerk for insisting that you guys search the forums instead of just making new threads and repeat discussions. Here's what a forum search came up for me:

pros/cons of 7200rpm HD?
Notebook Hard Drive Guide
Should I upgrade the hard drive?
How annoying is the 7200rpm hard drive?
To upgrade the hard drive or not to upgrade?
Seagate or Hitache 7200 RPM hard drive
IFL90 hard drive speed. 5400 vs. 7200

There's more, but I think I've made my point. You don't need to tell me about earning appreciations. I have made more contributions to the Lenovo forum than all of you on this thread combined (except Sam), and I know that long-time members are extremely annoyed when they see these same questions asked over and over and can be answered by at least 7 other threads from a search. The only difference is that they ignore threads like these and I come in to play the bad cop. Sorry for being the messenger.

I would tell you to hold off on both and just upgrade the hard drive on your own. I got my brand new Seagate 7200.2 160GB for $120, better than the other drives that Lenovo offers because it has perpendicular recording, sold the Hitachi 5K160 120GB that came with my T61 for $85, and it was only a ~$50 upgrade. Or, choose the better CPU first because that's harder and more expensive to upgrade in the future and do the HD upgrade on your own later when you have the money to spend.

EDIT:

Links fixed to prove my point about new users needing to be less lazy.

 

Many thanks, Playmaker, I knew you were a good fellow :yes: . Just the first link is good enough (btw the second link was mis-linked to the first one, and you duplicated the first link later).

Are there instructions somewhere about how to upgrade hard drive (like the one about upgrading ram)?

 

There are. It's in the ThinkPad Sticky. It's all under the "Hardware Maintenance Manuals" section.

 

Thank you, I found it. Damn easy. According to past forum posts it doesn't void warranty.