/ Sign-up
Your question

Whis would be best for performance?

  • Hard Drives
  • Storage
Last response: in Storage
May 6, 2010 11:24:34 AM

Well, as I dig deeper and deeper into my pockets, I'm stuck on my Hard Drives (That's plural) I've always only had one hard drive before, so I do not have any experience, with this RAID thing. The configuration I wanted, will consist of 2, maybe 3 HDD's. One would be my External, which I may put inside of the computer; but doubtful. I wanted to get an 80GB Seagate for my Boot Drive and either a 320 or 500GB along side of the 80GB. Or, I would get two(2) 500GB Drives and create a partition for the OS.

I'm a Gamer, so I was thinking of creating a partition of 40GB and 40GB, one for the OS and then the other 40GB for my Games. Hard Drives are far out of my reach still as I "master" the hardware of computers.

In short, which would I see more performance from: One(1) 80GB + 320 or 500GB Drive, or two(2) 500GB Drives?

Thank you in advance for the answers and information.


More about : whis performance

a c 127 G Storage
May 6, 2010 12:52:25 PM

80GB HDD? Those are very slow; as you know HDD performance scales with data density; currently the 500GB-per-platter are latest generation; that means the disk has to be multiples of 500GB or it will have smaller platters and thus being slower.
a b G Storage
May 6, 2010 1:01:32 PM

For the 80gb drive, are you considering a solid state drive? There's no reason to go find an 80gb traditional hd - if you could even find one, they are much slower than today's drives.

That answer will drive some other responses. For example, you don't want to partition an SSD.
Related resources
May 6, 2010 1:44:08 PM

SSD's are not to my likings right now (Price) and Seagate hasn't manufactured any, that I'm aware of. So, I am talking about a traditional HD; I'm guessing I should go with the larger drive? I'm getting a SATA 6.0GB/s Motherboard nad I've heard that there really isn't a huge difference between the two, SATA 3 and Sata 6. So I wouldn't exactly benefit from a SATA 6 over a SATA 3 HD, would I? There's a price gap between them and the SATA 6.0 are rather scarce, right now.
a b G Storage
May 6, 2010 2:37:01 PM

sata 6 is more of buying now in case you need it later. There's a difference between the 2, but the issue is today's traditional HDs aren't going to take advantage of even 3gb/s, much less 6. Some RAID or SSD configs may, but not a single HD.

So again just my thoughts, but if you're doing an add-in raid, don't worry as much about the motherboard capabilities if it's a BIG issue. If you can get a MB with the latest greatest, such as sata 6gb, and/or USB 3, at a small premium, it's worth it though.
May 6, 2010 4:17:45 PM

I'm getting the ASUS M4A89RD Pro, which will help future proof this system.

I'll just go with the WD Caviar Black 640GB, I don't really need more than one drive, I was just wanting to try something new, that's all :)  I'm sure I'll be adding something else in there, the next week! lol
a c 127 G Storage
May 6, 2010 8:01:44 PM

A single platter 500GB disk would be the fastest option. A 640GB disk is made of two 320GB platters and belongs to the previous generation HDDs.