Testseek.com have collected 35 expert reviews of the Samsung 3.5 inch SpinPoint F1 SATA300 HD-UJ Series and the average rating is 90%. Scroll down and see all reviews for Samsung 3.5 inch SpinPoint F1 SATA300 HD-UJ Series.
April 2008
(90%)
35 Reviews
Average score from experts who have reviewed this product.
Abstract: The HD103UJ is the top model of Samsungs new Spinpoint F1 family. While all are based on the same data density (350 GB per platter), rotation speed (7200 RPM) and interface (SATA/300), only the 1000 GB and 750 GB models have the full 32 MB of cache memory...
Abstract: Now is an exciting time for the storage industry. Not only have laptop hard drives seen capacities jump up to 500GB, but regular 3.5-inch desktop hard drives have reached the 2TB capacity point. These Serial-ATA drives are the mainstays for enthusias...
With the Spinpoint F1 1.0 TByte Sasmung has a hard diks in its portfolio with diverging performance figures. If we look at the sequential write performance in this particular test the Spinpoint F1 performs very well. If we also look at the random read ...
Abstract: When we first reviewed this hard disk 13 months ago we were bowled over by its performance, but at £216 including VAT, it was too expensive for a Best Buy award. Since then its price has plummeted, but it remains one of the fastest hard disks availa...
Abstract: A lot of high performance storage at a very attractive price. And its quiet, too. Samsung - Spinpoint F1 price Buy Samsung Spinpoint F1 securely online at a bargain price £67 inc. VAT Samsung: 01932 455 000 www.samsung.com Find other articles about S...
All four Terabyte drives in this round-up offer a colossal amount of storage at a very reasonable price. The Hitachi is showing its age but still delivers decent performance, but we were less convinced by the green power saving features of the Western...
Abstract: Samsung specifies an 8.9 ms seek time, which results in an effective average access time (including rotational latency) of 14.2 ms. Compared to Seagate (12.7 ms) and Hitachi (13.8 ms), this is clearly slower, but the result is still better than the 15.0/1...
