Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

32MB Cache on a 250GB Drive?

Last response: in Storage
Share
March 10, 2008 3:39:00 PM

I just wanted to confirm that this drive:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148309
does indeed have 32MB cache. It just seems strange because it's a 250GB drive, and I've not seen a drive of that size have a cache that big. And NewEgg has been mislabeling things as of late, so just wanted to make sure.

If it is in fact 32MB, then it would be a great drive to get no? That much cache for a relatively small capacity drive should make things pretty damn fast I'm guessing. Possibly noticeable? Or maybe not. Human perception cannot distinguish between 2 milliseconds and 3 milliseconds, so do you guys think it would have an actual noticeable difference in speed from a 250GB drive with 16MB cache?

More about : 32mb cache 250gb drive

March 10, 2008 4:47:23 PM

This apparently is a new drive from Seagate and it does have a 32mb cache. For the home user, I don't know if the difference between it and a 16Mb cache would be perceptable. For a business user, it might be. It costs more, so I don't think its worth it. But that's just my opinion.
a b G Storage
March 10, 2008 7:10:16 PM

I have that drive and went from a 250GB 7200.10 16MB cache Seagate. It is a HUGE difference. It loads my games whickedly fast. They can almost run with a WD Raptor. It's worth it trust me. The ES.2 has the same specs as the 7200.11 but has a higher reliability and such. There is debate whether it is really needed, but it's not a big difference in cost so i got this one over the plain .11 one.
Related resources
March 10, 2008 7:13:13 PM

Now this is what I like, someone who has experience with both versions of the drive and can tell of their results. I will put this in mind for further consideration. Thank you.
a b G Storage
March 10, 2008 7:18:50 PM

I got this drive because my 80GB junk drive is making noise, 7200.9 drive. If you can't tell im a Seagate fan. I wanted to use my .10 for the junk drive and the ES.2 as my main drive. I used Norton Ghost to copy it over so it's the same install on the new drive. I loaded up World in Conflict and I was was like... WHooaaaaaaa! then COD4.. and WHoaaaaaaa!. When it reads hard you can hear it sometimes, a low mild tone. Sorta like a SCSI server dive does. But it really isn't any concern. I was just excited that it really did perform well.


March 11, 2008 5:43:29 AM

Excellent. Thanks for the input.

I might look into picking one up soon. I need a second drive and figured I could get this one to switch into my main and my current one as a backup/document drive. This drive seems like the way to go. I also love Seagate and have always had great experiences using them.

Thanks!
a b G Storage
March 11, 2008 7:29:07 AM

jay2tall said:
I got this drive because my 80GB junk drive is making noise, 7200.9 drive. If you can't tell im a Seagate fan. I wanted to use my .10 for the junk drive and the ES.2 as my main drive. I used Norton Ghost to copy it over so it's the same install on the new drive. I loaded up World in Conflict and I was was like... WHooaaaaaaa! then COD4.. and WHoaaaaaaa!. When it reads hard you can hear it sometimes, a low mild tone. Sorta like a SCSI server dive does. But it really isn't any concern. I was just excited that it really did perform well.


Yup when you ghosted it it copied one file at a time which basically did the ultimate defrag on your system and placed the page file in one long strip on your hdd which basically gave it the million bucks feel - in reality if you did a fresh install on both and tested em side by side, you wouldn't see any difference - at the end of the day the the heads still have to read the platters spinning at 7200 rpm, its still mechanically limited.

I used to be a Seagate fan but it seems when they took over Maxtor (who's drives i wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole) they seem to have become a little sloppy - iv sent back the same drive for warranty 3 times and its come back re badged as a certified Seagate repaired hdd, and another the same deal, once at least) - don't like them as much now, the WD AAKS series seems to feel faster and is more reliable (as a retailer, from what iv seen), but thats my luck.
March 12, 2008 2:02:03 AM

jay2tall said:
I have that drive and went from a 250GB 7200.10 16MB cache Seagate. It is a HUGE difference. It loads my games whickedly fast. They can almost run with a WD Raptor. It's worth it trust me. The ES.2 has the same specs as the 7200.11 but has a higher reliability and such. There is debate whether it is really needed, but it's not a big difference in cost so i got this one over the plain .11 one.


for the ES.2 is faster than the 7200.11? so a 7200.10 [ES.2] is faster than the 7200.11? if thats the case than I know what HDD to get for my next build, and btw which woudl u use fora boot disk the es.2 or a raptor 150gb?
a b G Storage
March 12, 2008 1:11:48 PM

apache_lives said:
Yup when you ghosted it it copied one file at a time which basically did the ultimate defrag on your system and placed the page file in one long strip on your hdd which basically gave it the million bucks feel - in reality if you did a fresh install on both and tested em side by side, you wouldn't see any difference - at the end of the day the the heads still have to read the platters spinning at 7200 rpm, its still mechanically limited.

I used to be a Seagate fan but it seems when they took over Maxtor (who's drives i wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole) they seem to have become a little sloppy - iv sent back the same drive for warranty 3 times and its come back re badged as a certified Seagate repaired hdd, and another the same deal, once at least) - don't like them as much now, the WD AAKS series seems to feel faster and is more reliable (as a retailer, from what iv seen), but thats my luck.


I completely formatted and reinstalled everything on the 7200.10 drive 3 weeks before I bought the new drive actually. I did a defrag on the drive after reinstalling everything and basically there was very little fragmented items. So my point is completly valid with regard to the .11 being MUCH faster than the .10

I do not like Maxtor at all. I've had bad experiences with them. Not sure if they've gotten better because of seagate buying them of is seagate took on some of maxtors issues. Regardless I've never had issues with any of my seagates.
a b G Storage
March 12, 2008 1:13:58 PM

FrozenGpu said:
for the ES.2 is faster than the 7200.11? so a 7200.10 [ES.2] is faster than the 7200.11? if thats the case than I know what HDD to get for my next build, and btw which would u use for a boot disk the es.2 or a raptor 150gb?

The ES.2 and 7200.11 have the same performance. the ES.2 is is just the "enterprise server" type drives. the .10 drives are older. I believe they had an ES model that is their equivilent.
March 12, 2008 8:59:44 PM

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Productcompare.aspx?Submi...

So these two drives wopuld be equivalents? in perfromance, not in capacity obviously.

Because I would think that hte Es.2 would be better b/c I assume it has a single platter compared to the 7200.11 in this case scenario, right?

And lets say I were to use one of these seagates and a raptor, would it be best to use which one as a boot drive and one as a storage drive? and should I have a another smaller drive just for the page file? can i do that for xp?
a b G Storage
March 19, 2008 8:40:16 AM

jay2tall said:
I completely formatted and reinstalled everything on the 7200.10 drive 3 weeks before I bought the new drive actually. I did a defrag on the drive after reinstalling everything and basically there was very little fragmented items. So my point is completly valid with regard to the .11 being MUCH faster than the .10

I do not like Maxtor at all. I've had bad experiences with them. Not sure if they've gotten better because of seagate buying them of is seagate took on some of maxtors issues. Regardless I've never had issues with any of my seagates.


Windows defrag moves files so there all in straight lines pretty much rather then all over the place per file, it doesnt actually move all the files to the inside of the hdd platter (slightly quicker access times), and it cant move files being used, including most of windows and the page file - when you ghosted everything would have been on the inside, and in one big group, with one fresh complete segment for the page file - try ghosting your new hdd back to the old and post back with what feels faster :sarcastic:  i do this every day of the week, seen it all before.

As for seagate/maxtor, the new maxtors look identical to the seagate drives, and even the model numbers eg seagate = STxxxxxx, maxtor/seagate drives are labeled as STMxxxxx (ST being seagates old old code, after CP/Conner peripherals).

!