Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

3.0gb/s Velociraptor vs. New HDs

Last response: in Storage
Share
April 7, 2010 8:54:25 PM

So I recently got a 10,000rpm 16mb cache, 300gb WD Velociraptor HD. I was concerned with it only have 16mb of cache, and now I'm seeing newer Hard Disks that have 64mb of cache @ 7200rpm. Does anyone know how close in performance these two would be? How much of a difference does more cache make?

More about : 0gb velociraptor hds

a c 415 G Storage
April 7, 2010 9:28:05 PM

The cache difference isn't going to be significant.

The advantage of the Velociraptors is that they have faster access times than 7200RPM drives. Some other high-density drives may have better transfer rates, but for use as an OS drive you'll get better boot and application startup times with the Velociraptors because those kinds of activities require reading lots of relatively small files, and access times are the bottleneck for that.
m
0
l
a b G Storage
April 8, 2010 1:26:32 AM

solce said:
So I recently got a 10,000rpm 16mb cache, 300gb WD Velociraptor HD. I was concerned with it only have 16mb of cache, and now I'm seeing newer Hard Disks that have 64mb of cache @ 7200rpm. Does anyone know how close in performance these two would be? How much of a difference does more cache make?

You should read the article on the new velociraptor that tom's has up right now. It has your drive as well as they new ones that they just came out with, and basically backs up what sminlal said.
m
0
l
!