A Computer hardware and components forum. ComputerBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ComputerBanter.com forum » Processors » Overclocking
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Seagate drive model # and serial# don't match. ST1000DM003



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 6th 13, 07:38 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Bob F
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 125
Default Seagate drive model # and serial# don't match. ST1000DM003

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?



  #2  
Old September 6th 13, 08:52 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Paul
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.

http://www.seagate.com/staticfiles/s...100529369b.pdf
http://www.seagate.com/staticfiles/s...100686584d.pdf

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.

Paul
  #3  
Old September 6th 13, 09:06 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
David H. Lipman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 408
Default Seagate drive model # and serial# don't match. ST1000DM003

From: "Bob F"

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 would put a complaint, in writing, to SeaGate. Fully document the
differences and why you have the SATA III drive in the first place. While
they have the right to give you a refurbished drive as a replacement, it
does not conform to to their warranty stating "functionally equivalent
replacement product".

"If Seagate authorizes you to return your product to Seagate or an
authorized service provider, Seagate will replace your product without
charge with a functionally equivalent replacement product. Seagate may
replace your product with a product that was previously used, repaired and
tested to meet Seagate specifications. Seagate will pay to ship the
replacement product to you. By sending product for replacement, you agree to
transfer ownership of the original product to Seagate. Seagate will not
return your original product to you. Data recovery is not covered under this
limited warranty and is not part of the repair or exchange process. If you
would like data recovery performed on your drive, it is available from
Seagate as a separate service for an additional charge. Seagate warrants
that repaired or replaced products are covered for the greater of either the
remainder of the original product warranty or 90 days."

http://www.seagate.com/support/warra...umer-warranty/

Seagate Technology LLC
10200 S. De Anza Blvd
Cupertino, CA, 95014


--
Dave
Multi-AV Scanning Tool - http://multi-av.thespykiller.co.uk
http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp

  #4  
Old September 6th 13, 09:35 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Bob F
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 125
Default Seagate drive model # and serial# don't match. ST1000DM003

Paul wrote:
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.

http://www.seagate.com/staticfiles/s...100529369b.pdf
http://www.seagate.com/staticfiles/s...100686584d.pdf

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.


Seagate tells me the serial# I sent them shows the specs for the drive they sent
me. They seemed to have no comments to my statement that the drive I have says
on the label "ST1000DM003", and that their own web site says that drive is
SATA3, 64MB cache, which the one they sent me is not. I talked to 2 people there
and got basically the same story. It is as if they shipped ST1000DM003 drives
that were not up to the currently advertised specs although they wouldn't
actually say that. So should I call again and escalate to a higher level?


  #5  
Old September 6th 13, 11:03 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
David H. Lipman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 408
Default Seagate drive model # and serial# don't match. ST1000DM003

From: "Bob F"


Seagate tells me the serial# I sent them shows the specs for the drive
they sent me. They seemed to have no comments to my statement that the
drive I have says on the label "ST1000DM003", and that their own web site
says that drive is SATA3, 64MB cache, which the one they sent me is not. I
talked to 2 people there and got basically the same story. It is as if
they shipped ST1000DM003 drives that were not up to the currently
advertised specs although they wouldn't actually say that. So should I
call again and escalate to a higher level?


No. Put it in writing !


--
Dave
Multi-AV Scanning Tool - http://multi-av.thespykiller.co.uk
http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp

  #6  
Old September 19th 13, 05:41 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
~misfit~[_16_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 110
Default Seagate drive model # and serial# don't match. ST1000DM003

Somewhere on teh intarwebs Bob F wrote:
[snip]
It is as if they shipped ST1000DM003 drives that were not up
to the currently advertised specs although they wouldn't actually say
that.


Interestingly when I got my ST1000DM003 from Amazon I read the customer
reviews and it seems that Seagate *are* (or were) re-labeling their older
drives and selling them as new generation.

This page / review is mostly about the 2TB version but does cover the others
in the Seagate '1TB / platter' range:

http://www.amazon.com/Seagate-Barrac...owViewpoints=1

So you see it's entirely possible that you in fact *did* have an older gen
drive to start with! :-(

That's one of the reasons I went for the 1TB drive - it's much thinner so
there's no way they can give you a two-platter drive in it's stead. Was your
drive thin? They if it were could however still give you a drive with
different cache etc. than you thought you were paying for. I am a Seagate
man, have been ever since I got burned with the WD 'Green' drives (and since
with USB external drives that can't even saturate a USB 2 bus, yet alone USB
3) - However this sort of thing worries me.....

(I seriously dislike crossposting and usually remove it. This one time I'll
let it stand as I'm reading from overclocking.)
--
/Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long, way when religious belief has a
cozy little classification in the DSM."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
[Sent from my OrbitalT ocular implant interface.]


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Four same-model Seagate drives, three different firmware versions. Percival P. Cassidy Storage (alt) 2 August 20th 13 02:09 PM
urgent data recovery needs drive with exact p/n match ..... helpanyone?? [email protected] General 1 April 28th 08 03:41 PM
Seagate Model ST3200822A daveiosys Storage & Hardrives 1 March 10th 05 04:26 PM
Seagate 160mb SATA drive and Seagate DiscTools Problems - PLEASEREAD Sgt_Wilson Storage (alt) 3 May 30th 04 04:53 PM
Serial ATA: Western Digital or Seagate? Zed Storage (alt) 2 February 29th 04 09:21 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 ComputerBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.