Test notes
Today we'll be comparing the performance of the mobile ATA hard drives we've already discussed. We've also thrown in a couple of additional drives for good measure, including a Serial ATA version of the Momentus 7200.1 that took top honors in our recent 2.5" Serial ATA hard drive comparo. That should give us a good idea of how the Serial ATA interface and features like Native Command Queuing can impact mobile hard drive performance. We've also included a Barracuda 7200.9 desktop SATA drive to highlight how 2.5" hard drive performance compares to what's available in the 3.5" desktop world. Obviously, we expect the Barracuda to sweep our performance tests, but it will be interesting to see by how much, and at what power consumption cost.

The drives we're comparing differ when it comes to external transfer rates, spindle speeds, platter densities, and capacity, all of which can have an impact on performance. Keep in mind the following differences as we move through our benchmarks:

At 7,200 RPM, we have a pretty even matchup between the Momentus 7200.1 and Travelstar 7K100. Both drives feature 50 GB platters and sport 8 MB of cache, so neither has an obvious advantage. Things are a little more complicated on the 5,400-RPM front, though. There, we have drives with 50, 60, and 80 GB platters, although all at least have 8 MB of cache. And then there's the MHV2040AT, whose slow spindle speed and diminutive cache put it at a distinct disadvantage.

Since this comparison focuses on 2.5" drive performance, we've only included one desktop-class 3.5" drive for reference. However, all testing was conducted on the same platform as our 3.5" hard drive reviews, so you can compare the performance of our mobile drives with a wider range of 3.5" drives by flipping back to our Western Digital Raptor X review. Our test system is also identical to the one used in our 2.5" Serial ATA hard drive comparo, so those results are comparable, as well. However, we have changed the way we conduct power consumption tests, so you won't be able to compare power consumption scores from this review with those in older articles.

Before diving into our test results, we'd like to take a moment to thank NCIX for hooking us up with the MHV2040AT and Travelstar 5K100 and 7K100. NCIX is one of Canada's best online retailers, and having one of their retail locations within walking distance of my Benchmarking Sweatshop is quite handy.

Our testing methods
All tests were run three times, and their results were averaged, using the following test system.

Our test system was powered by OCZ PowerStream power supply units. The PowerStream was one of our Editor's Choice winners in our last PSU round-up.

We used the following versions of our test applications:

• WorldBench 5.0
• Intel IOMeter v2004.07.30
• Xbit Labs File Copy Test v1.0 beta 13
• TCD Labs HD Tach v3.01
• Far Cry v1.3
• DOOM 3
• Intel iPEAK Storage Performance Toolkit 3.0

The test systems' Windows desktop was set at 1280x1024 in 32-bit color at an 85Hz screen refresh rate. Vertical refresh sync (vsync) was disabled for all tests.

All the tests and methods we employed are publicly available and reproducible. If you have questions about our methods, hit our forums to talk with us about them.