THE CAVIAR BLACK HARD DRIVE comes in 32 and 64 mb buffer sizes for 1TB version. The 64 buffer is 20 dollars more, is the performance worth the money?

5 answers Last reply
More about caviar black buffer
  1. Can you give the specific model numbers you're looking at (for example, I'm guessing that WD1001FALS is one of them).

    I wouldn't normally expect the difference in cache size to make a significant difference in performance, but without see the specs for the drives I'm a little reluctant to say one way or the other.
  2. WD1002FAEX is the 64 cache and
    WD1001FALS is the well known 32 cache version.

    The most interesting thing is that Western Digital does not list WD1002FAEX on their official website at all. All they advertise is the 32MB cache 1 tb drive. I wonder how it is on sale on Newegg when WD does not even list it as one of their current products.

    Thank you.

    Best Regards,
  3. I also found this:

  4. Here's the Western Digital Web Page for the drive.

    The performance difference in the graph you found agrees with the specification sheets for the drives - the FAEX has 126MB/sec sustained transfer rate vs. 106MB/sec for the FALS. This won't have anything to do with the cache per se, but is more likely the result of higher platter density.

    So the long and short of it is - yeah, probably it's worth the extra $20 to get the faster drive.
  5. Thank you very much. Have a beautiful day.
Ask a new question

Read More

Hard Drives Western Digital Caviar Storage