Which of These 2 HDD's Will be Better For RAID 0 Setup
Last response: in Storage
The first is the Single Platter 160GB 7200RPM 8MB Western Digital Caviar SE WD1600AAJS That Tom's Hardware Reviewed With 80mb/s transfer rates, and that it is insanely cool. LINK
The other is another Western Digital Caviar RE WD1600YS 160GB, but its not the one reviewed by Toms Hardware with 80mb/s however it is 16mb cache with RAID-specific time limited error recovery
My question is, in getting a set of these drives for a RAID 0 setup, would i be better off going with 2 of the praised Western Digital Caviar SE WD1600AAJS or the Caviar RE WD1600YS with RAID-specific time limited error recovery, or would it not really matter either way?
The other is another Western Digital Caviar RE WD1600YS 160GB, but its not the one reviewed by Toms Hardware with 80mb/s however it is 16mb cache with RAID-specific time limited error recovery
My question is, in getting a set of these drives for a RAID 0 setup, would i be better off going with 2 of the praised Western Digital Caviar SE WD1600AAJS or the Caviar RE WD1600YS with RAID-specific time limited error recovery, or would it not really matter either way?
More about : hdd raid setup
raid 0 or not, referring to the interactive charts, that is one fast 7200 hdd (the fastest 7200, or just about), having a 160GB platter certainly helps, lol
go for the AAYS 16MB if it also has a 160GB platter, otherwise just go for the AAJS version with 8MB cache (also assuming theyre about the same price too)
go for the AAYS 16MB if it also has a 160GB platter, otherwise just go for the AAJS version with 8MB cache (also assuming theyre about the same price too)
i mustve misread what you put, i think i did
either way, go for whichever one offers the larger platter size, the cache difference doesnt matter nearly as much
unless you have a benchmark of the 1600YS, and its closely comparable to the AAJS in performance, the 1600YS wouldnt be worth considering, IMO
either way, go for whichever one offers the larger platter size, the cache difference doesnt matter nearly as much
unless you have a benchmark of the 1600YS, and its closely comparable to the AAJS in performance, the 1600YS wouldnt be worth considering, IMO
Related ressources:
- Forum1 SSD vs. 2 HDD RAID-0
- ForumSSD plus 1 HDD vs. 2 HDDs in RAID 0 or use external drives for video editing on
- Forumwhich HDD 's for RAID-0 (many channels)
- ForumData & Media Drive: HDD +SSD cache or 2 xHDD in RAID 0 ?
- ForumSSD Raid 0 or HDD Raid 0 for Fraps & Dxtory?
- ForumSSD Experts wanted: Low benchmark scores for OCZ Vertex 2 RAID0 setup
- ForumOCZ Vertex 2 60gb Raid 0 Setup (first time)
- ForumSSD vs HHD vs RAID0 HDD
- ForumWhich HDD setup is better IYO?
- ForumI want a RAID 0 Array w/ 2 750gb hdd for hd video editing
- ForumQuestion about moving old RAID0 HDD to new PC.
- ForumSSD boot drive & RAID-0 Storage setup
- ForumGot 2 nd 500GB HDD want to build RAID 0 but.....
- ForumMoving my Pagefile to my RAID ' 0 ' HDD 's
- Forum16MB cache on hdd...better than 8 even under RAID 0 ?
- Forum1 HDD vs. 2 HDD RAID-0
- ForumWhere do I find HDD's temperature charts ?
- ForumHow do I boot from Second HDD?
- ForumCHEAP DVD BURNERS. DO I HAVE A BUG FOR YOU ALL!!!!
- Forump5b duluxe is giving me raid 10 or 01?
- More resources
Read discussions in other Storage categories
!
