Currently, I have a build with 2x 250GB WD Caviars in RAID 0. The setup seems pretty fast and gets a 5.9 in Vista's Performance Index (if that matters at all). Now, I need more storage and I am thinking about the Seagate 250 GB 7200.10 drive, which has exceptional reviews everywhere. The problem is, for $20 more, I can purchase the Seagate Barracuda ES.2 ST3250310NS 250GB (32 MB cache). This drive as also seen excellent reviews.
The problem is, I've never seen a comparison including these two drives and I have no idea if the performance advantage of the latter justifies the $20 premium. The warranty and MTBF may provide some incentive to go with the server drive as well.
In addition, I have no idea whether or not I should continue using my motherboard RAID solution. I have an ASUS M2R32-MVP (Socket AM2) and I'm not sure if its RAID 0 performance is beneficial to me. If I were to go RAID, should I get the server or desktop drives. Also, since these drives are faster than WD Raptors as it is, should I just leave them alone?
what are you using it for primarily and how much storage do you need? $ willing to spend?
August 6, 2008 9:29:24 PM
tbh... 20 $ doesn't really matter in technology.. 30 - 40 bucks is where the limit starts to be pushed... if 20 bucks really does matter then get the 7200.10 drive because you'll get maybe half a percent worse performance... i mean the 32 mb doesn't really make a huge difference... a fast spindel disk rotation would matter...
but it sounds like your using your drives for storage... so you don't really need stellar performance
I do need extra storage, but I am considering completely taking my OS off of my raid setup and putting it on one or two of the new drives. I'm willing to spend the $160 necessary to purchase a couple of ES.2 drives.