MBP hard drive upgrade. 8mb or 16mb cache?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by hooly, Aug 17, 2008.

  1. hooly macrumors regular

    hooly

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
    #1
  2. ZballZ macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2006
  3. hooly thread starter macrumors regular

    hooly

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
  4. noodle654 macrumors 68020

    noodle654

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2005
    Location:
    Never Ender
    #4
    Depends on how much you want to spend. The difference from 8MB to 16MB has to do with constantly reading/opening the same file, such as a JPEG or an MP3. Other than that, you wont notice anything from 8MB to 16MB. I think that you should get the 8MB because its not worth that extra 60 to just get another 8MB cache, if it was also 72k drive, than I would tell you to get the 16MB. Have you looked at any other hard drive brands?
     
  5. gr8bob macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    #5
    Drives with more cache generally have a better performance under load. Of course, the example above, the drive with 16MB cache spins at 7200rpm, which SHOULD be the better performer.
     
  6. noodle654 macrumors 68020

    noodle654

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2005
    Location:
    Never Ender
    #6
    Whoops...I thought it said 54k for the 16MB...I thought that was odd...

    OP: If you got the cash, I would get the the more expensive (16MB 7200RPM)
     
  7. Merkuryy macrumors regular

    Merkuryy

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2007
    Location:
    Shanghai, China
    #7
    Agreed!! The MBP can only get two update, Memory and Hardrive, upgrading to 4G is not very expensive, and I won't open up my MBP twice for more room, so I would definitely go to the extreme(for me it's 320G, i need space the most). So for you, if you got the cash, go for the 16M
     
  8. hooly thread starter macrumors regular

    hooly

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
    #8
    Thanks, I hadnt noticed that the 16mb drive was 7200rpm... I went for that one :)
     
  9. ZballZ macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2006
    #9
    Have you made sure that they are 100% compatible with your MBP??

    Also, I would consider power-consumption and noise. My guess would be that the 54k is more power effecient and probably also quieter - But i am not sure...
     
  10. hooly thread starter macrumors regular

    hooly

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
    #10
    I hope so ! If anyone knows different please shout :)
     
  11. Firefly2002 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    #11
    The cache is meaningless, but as has been pointed out, one spins at 7200 RPM, vs. the slower 5400 RPM, which will make a real difference in real-world performance (unlike cache size, which doesn't even affect synthetic benchmarks).

    If you want to pay another $60, go for the 7.2K RPM drive; it's definitely faster.
     
  12. Bobioden macrumors 68000

    Bobioden

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2007
    Location:
    Denver
    #12
    They are both completely compatible with your MBP.
     
  13. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #13
    The cache not make a lot of difference. Just don't buy a drive with only 2MB cache. ;)
     
  14. gr8bob macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    #14
    I'd reckon so.. I'd assume that the 7200rpm drive has a bigger cache size is because of the spindle speed.
     
  15. Firefly2002 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    #15
    Cache size has nothing to do with spindle speed.
     
  16. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #16
    But bigger cache is needed for higher read/write of the faster spindle speeds.
     
  17. andrewdale macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    Location:
    Memphis, TN
    #17
    I know that it has been noted quite a few times, between the HDDs Apple puts in, that there is hardly any, if any, difference in battery life between the 5.4k and the 7.2k.

    Noise, I know that has been mentioned, also, with little difference.

    However, I'm not entirely sure how that relates to these drives. I doubt you'll have any noticeable differences, though.
     
  18. m1stake macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Location:
    Philly
    #18
    Arguable with laptops; the difference in boot time, which is where most of this speed will come into play, is minimal. IMO if you are looking for a real performance jump in your HDD, you should save your money for one of the Intel or Samsung SSD's which are approaching "reasonable" (Read: Almost competitive with the velociraptor) prices.
     
  19. gr8bob macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    #19
    What I mean is to compliment the spindle speed.
     
  20. Firefly2002 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    #20
    I know... but it doesn't complement a faster spindle speed because cache size is a marketing gimmick, and doesn't affect performance. It's important to have hard drive cache, just not important once you already have about 512 KB.
     
  21. freeflywing macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2008
    #21
    power saving: you should go for the Scorpio blue, 5400 is good enough for most user.

    performance wise: you should go for the Scorpio black, especially you do video editing.
     
  22. hooly thread starter macrumors regular

    hooly

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
    #22
    I am now finding numerous reports on forums that the motion sensor's in WD drives can conflict with the MBP motion sensors and cause problems (kernel panics).

    Most but not all of the posts are quite old. The recommended solution is to turn off motion sensor in the MBP.

    Anyone have any knowledge about this?

    Thanks.
     
  23. gr8bob macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    #23
    Had WD3200BEVT (Scorpio Blue) in my previous MBP, doesn't seem to affect it at all.

    For the Scorpio Black (7200rpm), just look out for the WD3200BJKT model (with free fall sensor) as the one without (WD3200BEKT) should be the one you'll want.
     
  24. Neil321 macrumors 68040

    Neil321

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2007
    Location:
    Britain, Avatar Created By Bartelby
    #24
    Their have also been loads of reports that doesn't make a blind bit of difference, like the about user i've had one of the BEVT's in one of my MBP's since a few days after it was released with no issues whatsoever
     
  25. hooly thread starter macrumors regular

    hooly

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
    #25
    It seems I ordered the one with the free fall sensor, so I am having doubts now!
     

Share This Page