How fast is this 1 TB harddrive compared to a 3.0 harddrive from Seagate?
1190421
It's slower being it's usb 2.0. I don't know what the benchmark numbers for usb 3.0 but I would assume it's quite a bit faster. I had need of the older legacy 2.0 and the price was right for me.
786900
Yes... Since its not a RAID enclosure, you can copy from one drive to the other from within. You get normal SATA 3G speeds when doing this.
482507
i agree seagate is not even worth looking at now just taking up shelf space. i have older maxtor, WD and other drives and still running good. I got a seagate from an expensive company that sells decent computers but after 1st power up of a 1tb single disk plugged it in and drive shut down and stopped working. i got a WD for almost the same price.
1571721
Not to my knowledge. My desktop is less than a year old, so I would assume it's rocking 3.0. The hard drive itself only came with one USB cable and I don't see a spot for another. When I first got it, I moved all of my media to it - about 90GB of stuff, and it was pretty quick. The Transcend website seems to support my assumption, Google it for details. Hope that helps :)
2037500
Google it...it's just a slow 1 terabyte hard drive produced by Western Digital...you can buy from Amazon or Newegg
482174
No, Here is a link to the 1 TB black edition Western Digital Caviar Black 1 TB SATA III 7200 RPM 64 MB Cache Internal Desktop 3.5" Hard Drive (WD1002FAEX ) (Old Model)
512456
Yes, the Seagate hard drive works with either 2.0 or 3.0 . . . the transfer rate is faster with 3.0
166153
The documentation states 3TB max. I am running 3TB drives with Mac, USB 3 is slow.
979846
I have yet to see a HDD run at 6 GBps. It does seem to be as fast as if the drive was internally installed.
771398
All I can tell you is that I had this drive for 6 months and it works perfectly, it is 1.5TB. Again I can't compare because I have not owned the 1TB Blue SATA
1846605
Yes, runs at a full 3.0 speed and has enough power to run my Seagate Backup Plus ext hds
1786849
I'm getting just under 130MB/s read and write. It took under 2 hours to copy some files (around a TB) that took seven hours under USB 2.0.
774625
Yes, you will notice a major difference with 3.0 compared to 2.0. I was able to copy 5GB of files in about 2 minutes on 3.0 whereas 2.0 would take me about 10+ minutes.
1968889
Interestingly enough, Seagate has chosen to NOT list the speed of the drive either on the box, on the actual drive or even in the rather skimpy documentation. It is possible that the Seagate site might be able to tell you. All I can say is that it is very quiet and I can't complain about the data transfer rate.
291733
Check the failure rates of 4 TB vs 1 TB/2 TB drives first. Also, what do you really plan to do? SSD is quick, definitely. You could get a 128 GB SSD for the OS and offload most program installs, profile info etc., onto a 2TB drive. You'd have speed + lots of storage. But if you want speed + storage redundancy you can try a RAID configuration.Honestly, SDD's are quick but I don't get bummed or impatient when my workstation--which uses conventional SATA drives--takes 10-12 seconds to boot (vs. 3-5 seconds for my ultrabook, which has SSD). I just don't. It's an issue of cost. Many conventional drives have large caches on them. The best compromise are the hybrid drives, such as the Seagate Momentus XT series. Check the failure rates of 4 TB vs 1 TB/2 TB drives first. Also, what do you really plan to do? SSD is quick, definitely. You could get a 128 GB SSD for the OS and offload most program installs, profile info etc., onto a 2TB drive. You'd have speed + lots of storage. But if you want speed + storage redundancy you can try a RAID configuration.Honestly, SDD's are quick but I don't get bummed or impatient when my workstation--which uses conventional SATA drives--takes 10-12 seconds to boot (vs. 3-5 seconds for my ultrabook, which has SSD). I just don't. It's an issue of cost. Many... » Read More Check the failure rates of 4 TB vs 1 TB/2 TB drives first. Also, what do you really plan to do? SSD is quick, definitely. You could get a 128 GB SSD for the OS and offload most program installs, profile info etc., onto a 2TB drive. You'd have speed + lots of storage. But if you want speed + storage redundancy you can try a RAID configuration.Honestly, SDD's are quick but I don't get bummed or impatient when my workstation--which uses conventional SATA drives--takes 10-12 seconds to boot (vs. 3-5 seconds for my ultrabook, which has SSD). I just don't. It's an issue of cost. Many conventional drives have large caches on them. The best compromise are the hybrid drives, such as the Seagate Momentus XT series. « Show Less
1226791
USB 2.0. That being said, the max speed I have gotten from a USB 3.0 disk on the TS-269 is only slightly higher than the transfer speed to a USB 2.0 disk. There are a lot of factors to consider when thinking about bus speed. The USB 2.0 transfer rate exceeds a gigabit network connection's transfer rate by a factor of 5, so over the network, both 2.0 and 3.0 operate at the same speed (the max network speed). The only time a USB 3.0 disk could be an advantage is if you are backing up the NAS to an external hard drive, and excepting your initial backup, subsequent backups shouldn't take much time anyway unless a lot of new data was added to the NAS in between.
1976820
The drive as it is , is a USB3 . To have it Thunderbolt capable you would need to buy the optional Thunderbolt adapter. Would the Thunderbolt adapter workd on the 1 TB drive ?. I dont know