I have a 1 TB drive from this series. The 1.5 TB drive is about 10% faster.
The Stor.E Alu I think is an elegant external hard drive in an aluminum housing, which thermally makes a better impression than the plastic housing of the Basics series. And the price difference is so minimal that it is better to resort to the aluminum version.
Here was already often reported that the controller has solved.
This problem, I did not, because I transport the plate with cable. The cable is small enough and does not interfere in this case. It also stuck relative.
The plate is relatively quiet - they even heard - but unless you're sleeping on it, it does not really fall on (if I need the disk, then it is on the tower, and thus under the table).
In continuous operation (300 GB at a time copies), the plate is lukewarm. According CrystalDiskInfo there have been 41 ° C in the maximum. The plate is designed to 55 ° C.
For permanent work (hours of file copying at full speed), the board is not designed anyway.
The drive is as an external 2.5-inch drive relatively quickly. Miracles do not expect (especially in terms of access time).
In practice, for large files to reach average copy rates of 80-90 MB / s (backup images).
The supplied software Nero BackupIt Essential 12 I did not test it because it is too rudimentary and does not meet my standards of a backup program.
By the way, if you buy the integrated plate individually, then it is more expensive (90 euros as Stor.E / 110 Euro individually MQ01ABC150) at the moment more than 20 euros.
The guarantee is, however, may differ.
Below the data of some benchmark tests. The screenshots I invite then also still high.
With CrystalDiskMark way, I have ühöhere write values at random test measured after reformatting the disk!
-------------------------------------------------- ---------------------
CrystalDiskMark 3.0.2 (C) 2007-2013 hiyohiyo
-------------------------------------------------- ---------------------
* MB / s = 1,000,000 bytes / sec [SATA / 300 = 300,000,000 bytes / s]
Sequential Read: 116 651 MB / s
Sequential Write: 116 457 MB / s
Random Read 512KB: 36 939 MB / s
512KB Random Write: 48,722 MB / s
4KB Random Read (QD = 1): 0.507 MB / s [123.8 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD = 1): 1,214 MB / s [296.3 IOPS]
4KB Random Read (QD = 32): 0.574 MB / s [140.2 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD = 32): 1,208 MB / s [294.8 IOPS]
OS: Windows 7 Ultimate Edition SP1 [6.1 Build 7601] (x64)
Before formatting the values were
512KB Random Write: 18:57 MB / s
Random Write 4KB (QD = 1): 0.260 MB / s
Random Write 4KB (QD = 32): 0.265 MB / s
HD Tune Pro: TOSHIBA STOR.E ALU 2S
Benchmark
Test Capacity: full
Read transfer rate
Transfer Rate Minimum: 54.1 MB / s
Maximum transfer rate: 113.7 MB / s
Average transfer rate: 90.3 MB / s
Access Time: 17.9 ms
Burst rate: 158.2 MB / s
CPU Usage: 4.2%
Random Access
Test Capacity: full
Read Test
Transfer size Operations / sec avg. Access time max. Access Time avg. speed
512 bytes 56 IOPS 17,801 ms 30 735 ms 0.027 MB / s
4KB IOPS 57 17 257 ms 31 041 ms 0.226 MB / s
64K IOPS 18,409 ms 54 ms 33 065 3,395 MB / s
1 MB 34 IOPS 29,394 47,915 ms ms 34 020 MB / s
Random IOPS 24,259 ms 41 ms 43 902 20 916 MB / s
Transfer Rate Test
File Size: 500 MB
Sequential Read 113625 KB / s
Sequential write 106791 KB / s
Random Read IOPS 109
Random write IOPS 385
Random read (Queue Depth = 32) 111 IOPS
Random write (queue depth = 32) 362 IOPS
File Size: 5000 MB
Sequential Read 114319 KB / s
Sequential write 113457 KB / s
Random Read IOPS 99
Random write IOPS 309
Random read (Queue Depth = 32) 103 IOPS
Random write (queue depth = 32) 271 IOPS
Edit 19/07/2013:
The plate is only one SATA II disk, but this is negligible.
According to technical specifications, the consumption of pure hard disk (ie without the housing of the controller) at
1.7 (Read / Write) / 0.85 (Idle) / 12:18 (standby) / 00:15 (Sleep) Watt
The values for the impact strength are at 400 G (on the fly) and otherwise at 900 G.
As a comparison, the values of the current WD Caviar Blue and black are plates at 350/400 respectively 1000th
The GREEN Series in 300 or 650th
The shock sensitivity is therefore very good. (At least on paper)
The technical specifications of the 2 TB version in this regard are much worse and are in the range of GREEN Series WD!
Another note (on 08.14.2013 edited):
I initially had problems with the Toshiba and the WD TV Live. They did not seem to be 100% compatible. While the board worked fine, but if you 'Eject', so wanted to unsubscribe from the player, then the player hung up.
After it was reported here that there were no problems with the predecessor of the WD TV Live, I tested again.
The problems I can not understand. I do not know, therefore, what the problem was (the eject a WD worked). The problem therefore seems to be no longer possible. But I let the note still in it.