View Single Post
Old September 6th 13, 08:52 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
external usenet poster
Posts: 13,411
Default Seagate drive model # and serial# don't match. ST1000DM003

Bob F wrote:
I just received a warrantee replacement drive for my dead ST1000DM003. The
Replacement was a ST31000528AS refurb. which doesn't meet the same specs as the
origional. Seagate told me that my drive serial# shows up on their system as
the same specs as the replacement drive, not as a SATA 3, 64MB cache drive like
the ST1000DM003.They had no suggestion as to how this could be, but assured me
the replacement met the same specs as my origional.

Has anyone else out there run into this situation?

I don't really think it matters what happened to anyone else.

You sent in a ST1000DM003, the drive is not that old, and
you should be getting one back. Not a drive which is two
generations older.

In some scenarios, the old drive might actually be better
(small file transfers). But again, that's not the point.
The point is, it's a warranty claim, not a used car lot.

ST31000528AS ST1000DM003
7200.12 series 7200.14 (using web URL)

1000GB 1000GB
Heads 4 Heads 2
Discs 2 Discs 1
Bytes per sector 512 BPS 4096 with 512e emulation
Speed 7200 RPM 7200 RPM
Sustained data transfer (outside) 125MB/sec 156MB/sec
Cache 32MB Cache 64MB
Height 26.1mm (1.028 inch) Height 20.2mm (0.78 inch)
Average seek read 8.5ms Average seek read 8.5ms
Average seek write 9.5ms Average seek write 9.5ms
(Cable rate SATA II) (Cable rate SATA III)

Spec-wise, they're not even close to being the same. And I'm
not referring to the SATA II versus SATA III thing either.
That part is irrelevant. The 156MB/sec versus 125MB/sec
and being two generations apart, says they're not the same.

Only the capacity is the same.

In my experience here, with 512e drives, I find them less predictable
on how they'll work in real transfer scenarios. Sometimes, a 512
drive will beat them. A 512 drive doesn't do emulation, so no
read-modify-write shenanigans using the cache. This is important
for a WinXP user, less so for a Windows 8 user.

On large sequential transfers, the newer drive might complete
those in less time. But ever since 512e has come out, I've had
multiple drives that behaved "strange". And didn't work right.
So from that perspective, the 528AS might even be a win.

But this is a simple warranty issue, not a used car lot.

If they don't have a ST1000DM003 to ship, they
can ship a ST1500DM003 or a ST2000DM003 :-) Tell them
"they have the same specs, and are the same generation of drive" :-)
Thrown their notion of "the same", back in their face. Send
in a 156MB/sec drive, get a 156MB/sec drive back as a replacement.

Maybe you could try small claims court. Or something similar.


There is supposed to be a web page, for doing warranty serial
number checks on drives. If you can find that, enter the serial number
and see if other details populate with ST1000DM003 or not.
If so, tell them to "try again, dummies". And insist on
a 156MB/sec (i.e. same generation) of drive. I'm sure
they have refurb ST1000DM003 sitting there. They should
have a *huge* bone pile to choose from. They're Seagate.