Which HD should I get?

[Xephian]

I'm debating on whether to get a 74GB Raptor or a 400GB 16MB Cache HD. If I were to get the Raptor, then I would use that as my boot drive and my 250GB HD that came with my PM would be used for media. Does the 16MB cache on the 400GB make it as fast as the Raptor?

Raptor, $160, $120 AR. - http://www.newegg.com/product/Product.asp?item=N82E16822144160

WD 400GB 16MB Cache, $200, $180 AR. - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?item=N82E16822144423

 

[Crikey]

I doubt a 7200RPM hard disk will be as fast as the Raptor. But if I had to sit in the same room with this system, I'd get the 7200RPM drive. More capacity, and quieter. But then it all depends on what you do with your computer and what sacrifices you are willing to make to gain a tiny bit of extra disk I/O performance.

Have fun!


Crikey

 

[generik]

The raptor is pretty expensive.. I have 2 in my machine, and for that money I can probably buy 3 drives, each of which having twice the capacity.

Really depends on your needs, personally I find them a waste now. Rather just spend on more ram.

 

[Xephian]

The raptor is pretty expensive.. I have 2 in my machine, and for that money I can probably buy 3 drives, each of which having twice the capacity.

Really depends on your needs, personally I find them a waste now. Rather just spend on more ram.

I already have 2GB RAM on the way.

How loud are they? Do they produce more noise than 7200 RPM drives?

 

[grapes911]

How loud are they? Do they produce more noise than 7200 RPM drives?

Yes.

Personally, unless you have a server or are editing large file (like huge GB movies or something), stick with a 7200 RPM hard drive. I feel it is the best cost/benefit option. I also hear that 16 MB cache doesn't make that much of a difference over 8 MB in normal day-to-day computing. I'd get the 8 MB and get more storage for the same price.

 

[Sun Baked]

Hmmm...

WD740GD Average sustained transfer rate: 72MB/s

WD Caviar SE16 400GB Average sustained transfer rate: 61MB/s

All depends on whether 11MB/s is worth 300+GB, or whether a slightly slower drive is worth and extra $60.

Probably got the wrong specs, but that average sustained transfer rate is what moves your data once the cache goes dry.

 

[kwajo.com]

if you're not obsessed with every tiny ounce of speed, and you don't work with time-critical tasks, then get the 400GB drive, no questions asked

 

[Xephian]

Thanks for all your suggestions. I've decided to go with the 400GB drive instead. IMO, the extra 11MB transfer rate isn't worth the sacrifice of ~330GB.

 

[Bear]

I would recommend not getting a Western Digital drive at all.

From everything that I've seen, I would only get Seagate or Hitachi.

 

[Xephian]

I would recommend not getting a Western Digital drive at all.

From everything that I've seen, I would only get Seagate or Hitachi.

I did see a Seagate Barracuda for $16 more but there was no $20 rebate.

Anyway, I've never had any bad experiences with WD. I have 2x 200GB WD's in my PC and one I've had for over two years now with no problems.

EDIT: The Seagate also has only 8MB Cache Vs 16MB Cache.

 

[OutThere]

Definitely go for the 400 gig model, the extra space will come in seriously handy in the future, however little you think you'll use...it always seems to disappear and never want to come back!

The 16 meg cache will definitely speed things up, and from the looks of the transfer rates, the Raptor will give you a very minimal performance boost for a serious price hike and a major downgrade in capacity.🙂

 

[Counterfit]

I'm like that too. I tend to go for capacity over speed for hard drives. Of course, that's because most of my hard drive space is taken up by fansubbed anime...