Tera means 10^12 and not an approximation to 2^40, so the "evil" hdd manufacturers are correct. If you want to be factually correct and mean power of 2, use Tebi (Ti). 1 TiB = 1.099511627776 TB.
The need for adoption of binary prefixes is not wide-spread mostly because ram sizes come in multiplies of 2 for technical reasons, so there is no confusion when someone says 1 GB of ram when they mean 1 GiB. Personally I look forward to wide adoption of binary prefixes, because it is the factually correct thing to so.
Those stupid i standards were created after the fact, quite recently based on hard disk manufacturers constantly lying about capacity. KB, MB, GB and TB have always been binary-based and it's infuriating to be told otherwise, generally by people who are too young to realize that there is absolutely no factual or historic basis in the base 10 argument.
You guys really need to give this a rest. People think in terms of base 10. Only the weirdest geeks like to look at things any other way. Really, a 2TB drive is just that. No one is trying to lie about anything. There is no reason to market a drive as a 2.199 TiB drive. When we look at 960GB SSDs, we think of them as 1TB drives, because it's close enough.
It's not a geek vs. idiot issue. Computers address using binary. If you want to have bits on a drive then the total usable amount is going to be in powers of two. Maybe you make a hard drive with 10^13 bits (or 1.25 trillion bytes). You'll only be using 2^43 bits (or 1.099511627776 bytes).
There is a base in this. If you continue to do different from everyone else just because it has always been so, you end up with a confusing mess. No matter how the habits are strong, there comes a point where having 1 kB = 1024 B while 1 kg = 1000 g, 1 km = 1000m, 1 kV = 1000 V and even 1 kb/s = 1000 b/s is objectively stupid. Redefining your habits so that everything is unambiguous for everyone is much better, for everyone. And it's even more true when redifining your habits only mean adding a 'i' in the middle when it's necessary....
It's not about lying or evil on the part of drive makers. A client SSD needs ~8% spare nand capacity for background activity. Installing 1GiB of nand yields 1GB of user capacity and the right amount of spare to function properly. Misiu_mp showed the math above... 10% total spare for FW meta data and extra for background activity. Since each manufacture ended up a little different, IDEMA created a standard get them in sync across models and companies. http://www.idema.org/wp-content/plugins/download-m...
No, there is actually a factual and historical basis for base 10 - those are BIPM SI prefixes with specific meanings in terms of 10^n, and the most common ones (e.g. "kilo-") have been in use dating back centuries. It's the people who co-opted them for use to describe 2^n who were wrong (or rather, inaccurate).
I love how the people arguing for base 2 claim it's because the base 10 camp are too young to remember the history. SI prefixes are much, much older than the base 2 JEDEC prefixes. I bet you didn't know that only K, M and G existed in base 2 JEDEC, there was no binary based TB.
I'm actually thinking of buying this, under the hope that maybe it'll keep some wear and tear off the internal drive. I HATE that that thing isn't user replaceable...for that matter I also hate the "cloud saving" thing. Optional? Fine. But I want to manage my own saves, not have the only way to transfer stuff be through a small "cloud" storage that will eventually go away. Not to mention my One burns through a ton of data just playing normal offline single player games, I guess through constantly uploading saves...
You may be able to do that. Seagate external 2.5" drives usually are standard 2.5" drives with an adapter attached, so you could take it out of the case and put it into the PS4. Don't try this with WD external 2.5" drives though, those ones have USB right on their PCB and don't use a standard SATA drive.
I looked at this but passed on the green color, also only 5400 RPM. Wound up getting the HGST Tourio S, only 1TB but also 7200RPM. Seemed to be getting good reviews as probably the faster option for Xbox One expansion without spending a ton on something like an SSD.
It's marginal. The main performance gain is simply using any external drive as it frees the internal drive to do system IO operations exclusively. What external drive you use (5400 RPM, 7200 RPM, or SSD) has a nearly negligible effect on speed.
It would be great if these game consoles have a 3.5" HDD tray with caddy so everyone can just boy a drive from Newegg and swap in. 4TB 5900rpm drive is like what? $150?
I wonder if its going to be plugged pretty much permanently in a gaming console why not make it a externally powered 3.5inch drive. In this usecase there isn't much need for an usb powered drive.
One of the things you can do with it is bring it with you so you can bring your games to another console. A small USB powered drive is way better for this.
Over in the UK it seems to be £12 more than a standard seagate drive. Plus the 2tb external is the most failed hdd in the past year. I just use the last of my barracudas in an external caddy. Lots of people have lost faith in seagate hard drives but once you get to 4tb drives the old reputation of their reliability come back into play it seems. I have had 4 new seagate drives both internal and external fail in the last 10 months all 1/2tb drives - strange that.
Hmmmm... I want to move my Steam folder onto this. I'm pretty sure I could persuade some people it's a USB-powered "micro console" that allows PCs to play more games.
^ Essentially identical drive to the 2.5" external Seagate 2014 and 2015 models that actually cost less but don't have the colour green.
Since the XB1 is already a fairly large console, I see little point in this drive for it. If looking for bang-for-the-buck and long-term usage over the next 4-5 years of the console's life, or longer, I'd much rather just buy a 4-5TB 3.5" drive for $120-130. 2.5" HDDs are still overpriced due to the form factor and are more suitable for being a companion to a notebook while travelling where it's very convenient to use it as secondary storage/backup since it's powered via a USB. On the other hand, since the home console is plugged into a wall socket and isn't portable for most gamers, it makes way more sense to maximize storage size and speed (7200rpm) and just get a 3.5" external.
Is this drive compatible with original Xbox games? My first xbox360 was backward-compatible, but after replacing it (RROD) with a new version, I can no longer play original Xbox games due to hard drive compatibility
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
41 Comments
Back to Article
close - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
The couple of dollars might actually go to MS for the "XBox" certification.OrphanageExplosion - Saturday, October 10, 2015 - link
Except it's not a couple of dollars. It's $15 for a green piece of plastic and a 14 day Xbox Live code.Miller1331 - Tuesday, December 1, 2015 - link
Sounds like a rip-off to meDunkurs1987 - Saturday, February 6, 2016 - link
Actually you dont need "xbox drive" any drive would work. But if you fancy one WD do it cheaper: http://www.span.com/product/Western-Digital-My-Pas...domboy - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
I don't own an xbox, but I do like the green color!Miller1331 - Tuesday, December 1, 2015 - link
But the Xbox isn't even greenGigaplex - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
"(calculated in base 10 for reasons only marketing would be able to explain)"There's no physical or technical reason to calculate a magnetic platter using base 2 either. Only a historical one.
misiu_mp - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
Tera means 10^12 and not an approximation to 2^40, so the "evil" hdd manufacturers are correct.If you want to be factually correct and mean power of 2, use Tebi (Ti). 1 TiB = 1.099511627776 TB.
The need for adoption of binary prefixes is not wide-spread mostly because ram sizes come in multiplies of 2 for technical reasons, so there is no confusion when someone says 1 GB of ram when they mean 1 GiB. Personally I look forward to wide adoption of binary prefixes, because it is the factually correct thing to so.
Flunk - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
Those stupid i standards were created after the fact, quite recently based on hard disk manufacturers constantly lying about capacity. KB, MB, GB and TB have always been binary-based and it's infuriating to be told otherwise, generally by people who are too young to realize that there is absolutely no factual or historic basis in the base 10 argument.melgross - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
You guys really need to give this a rest. People think in terms of base 10. Only the weirdest geeks like to look at things any other way. Really, a 2TB drive is just that. No one is trying to lie about anything. There is no reason to market a drive as a 2.199 TiB drive. When we look at 960GB SSDs, we think of them as 1TB drives, because it's close enough.willis936 - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
It's not a geek vs. idiot issue. Computers address using binary. If you want to have bits on a drive then the total usable amount is going to be in powers of two. Maybe you make a hard drive with 10^13 bits (or 1.25 trillion bytes). You'll only be using 2^43 bits (or 1.099511627776 bytes).willis936 - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
2^43 bits = 1.099511627776 *trillion bytesnightbringer57 - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
No. You'll be using the whole 10^13 bits if the addresses are 44 bits or more. I fail to see the point.nils_ - Tuesday, October 13, 2015 - link
Also you can only write 512B or 4KiB blocks.nightbringer57 - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
There is a base in this. If you continue to do different from everyone else just because it has always been so, you end up with a confusing mess. No matter how the habits are strong, there comes a point where having 1 kB = 1024 B while 1 kg = 1000 g, 1 km = 1000m, 1 kV = 1000 V and even 1 kb/s = 1000 b/s is objectively stupid. Redefining your habits so that everything is unambiguous for everyone is much better, for everyone. And it's even more true when redifining your habits only mean adding a 'i' in the middle when it's necessary....Alexvrb - Monday, October 12, 2015 - link
But these are binary systems. Their mistake was borrowing familiar notation.woggs - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
It's not about lying or evil on the part of drive makers. A client SSD needs ~8% spare nand capacity for background activity. Installing 1GiB of nand yields 1GB of user capacity and the right amount of spare to function properly. Misiu_mp showed the math above... 10% total spare for FW meta data and extra for background activity. Since each manufacture ended up a little different, IDEMA created a standard get them in sync across models and companies. http://www.idema.org/wp-content/plugins/download-m...GokieKS - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
No, there is actually a factual and historical basis for base 10 - those are BIPM SI prefixes with specific meanings in terms of 10^n, and the most common ones (e.g. "kilo-") have been in use dating back centuries. It's the people who co-opted them for use to describe 2^n who were wrong (or rather, inaccurate).Gigaplex - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
I love how the people arguing for base 2 claim it's because the base 10 camp are too young to remember the history. SI prefixes are much, much older than the base 2 JEDEC prefixes. I bet you didn't know that only K, M and G existed in base 2 JEDEC, there was no binary based TB.Wolfpup - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
I'm actually thinking of buying this, under the hope that maybe it'll keep some wear and tear off the internal drive. I HATE that that thing isn't user replaceable...for that matter I also hate the "cloud saving" thing. Optional? Fine. But I want to manage my own saves, not have the only way to transfer stuff be through a small "cloud" storage that will eventually go away. Not to mention my One burns through a ton of data just playing normal offline single player games, I guess through constantly uploading saves...Flunk - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
I wouldn't worry about the internal drive, it will probably last the life of the system and if it doesn't it's easy to replace.melgross - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
It's not.why_wolf - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
It is in no way easy to replace the internal hard drive on the xbox. https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/Xbox+One+Hard+Drive+R...The PS4 by contrast is stupidly easy to replace. I'm not sure why Microsoft made replacing one of the two things most likely fail so hard to access.
Flunk - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
I think I'm going to get one of these for my PS4.peterfares - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
You may be able to do that. Seagate external 2.5" drives usually are standard 2.5" drives with an adapter attached, so you could take it out of the case and put it into the PS4. Don't try this with WD external 2.5" drives though, those ones have USB right on their PCB and don't use a standard SATA drive.csroc - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
I looked at this but passed on the green color, also only 5400 RPM. Wound up getting the HGST Tourio S, only 1TB but also 7200RPM. Seemed to be getting good reviews as probably the faster option for Xbox One expansion without spending a ton on something like an SSD.ZipSpeed - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
Is there any benefit from using a 7200 vs 5400 RPM drive?melgross - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
A tiny bit.petteyg359 - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
For random access, quite a bit. Not so much for sequential.peterfares - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
It's marginal. The main performance gain is simply using any external drive as it frees the internal drive to do system IO operations exclusively. What external drive you use (5400 RPM, 7200 RPM, or SSD) has a nearly negligible effect on speed.extide - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
You'd be better of with a hybrid drive, though.Peichen - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
It would be great if these game consoles have a 3.5" HDD tray with caddy so everyone can just boy a drive from Newegg and swap in. 4TB 5900rpm drive is like what? $150?olafgarten - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
That was like the OG PS3, the hard drive tray was behind a sticker and 2 standard screwspeterfares - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
Same with PS4. Except they both use 2.5" drives, not 3.5" drives. 360 and XB1 also use 2.5" drives. Only PS2 and the original Xbox used 3.5" drives.qlum - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
I wonder if its going to be plugged pretty much permanently in a gaming console why not make it a externally powered 3.5inch drive. In this usecase there isn't much need for an usb powered drive.Brett Howse - Thursday, October 8, 2015 - link
One of the things you can do with it is bring it with you so you can bring your games to another console. A small USB powered drive is way better for this.havokagain - Friday, October 9, 2015 - link
Over in the UK it seems to be £12 more than a standard seagate drive. Plus the 2tb external is the most failed hdd in the past year. I just use the last of my barracudas in an external caddy. Lots of people have lost faith in seagate hard drives but once you get to 4tb drives the old reputation of their reliability come back into play it seems. I have had 4 new seagate drives both internal and external fail in the last 10 months all 1/2tb drives - strange that.stephenbrooks - Sunday, October 11, 2015 - link
Hmmmm... I want to move my Steam folder onto this. I'm pretty sure I could persuade some people it's a USB-powered "micro console" that allows PCs to play more games.RussianSensation - Monday, October 12, 2015 - link
"Seagate 2TB Game Drive for Xbox review"http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2...
^ Essentially identical drive to the 2.5" external Seagate 2014 and 2015 models that actually cost less but don't have the colour green.
Since the XB1 is already a fairly large console, I see little point in this drive for it. If looking for bang-for-the-buck and long-term usage over the next 4-5 years of the console's life, or longer, I'd much rather just buy a 4-5TB 3.5" drive for $120-130. 2.5" HDDs are still overpriced due to the form factor and are more suitable for being a companion to a notebook while travelling where it's very convenient to use it as secondary storage/backup since it's powered via a USB. On the other hand, since the home console is plugged into a wall socket and isn't portable for most gamers, it makes way more sense to maximize storage size and speed (7200rpm) and just get a 3.5" external.
Miller1331 - Tuesday, December 1, 2015 - link
I run a 2.5 inch USB 3.0 Seagate drive and it works fine for mefotodave - Tuesday, March 1, 2016 - link
Is this drive compatible with original Xbox games? My first xbox360 was backward-compatible, but after replacing it (RROD) with a new version, I can no longer play original Xbox games due to hard drive compatibility