SATA H/D's

[DCB_AU]

Where the hell are the 40GB 7200 rpm SATA hard drives.

Are they going to be produced or do the producers want us to pay more- make more money if we buy the 80GB SATA H/D's.

Thanks,

<font color=red>DCB</font color=red><font color=white>_</font color=white><font color=blue>AU</font color=blue>

 

[KrazeIke]

seems like most people who are willing to pay the price premium for sata would be buying more than 40gb

 

[ghent123]

In most cases it's cheaper to buy the larger HD then a smaller one. Deponds on the size. I know I just bought a WD Caviar SE Serial ATA 120 GB SATA 8MB Cache. And I love it. Tho I wish MS would realize a lot of people are tired of Floppys.

Only set me back $150 CDN. And was only 10 more then the EIDE version of it.

 

[Vapor]

The closest thing (sizewise, at least) is a Raptor.

No reason to not get an 80GB drive, they're usually faster, only a little bit more expensive, and have double the storage.

Damn Rambus.

 

[Guest]

SATA is more of a high-end PC feature so I wouldn't think companies would waste time designing SATA models for the smaller drives. At least this seems to be the marketing theory on the Western Digital website.

 

[jmecor]

I thought that lesser storage = faster access times.
Since it wouldn't have to search for every sectors of the disks.

<b>MY PC SPECS</b>
Intel P4 2.0GHz | 256MB PC2100 DDR SDRAM | Nvidia GeForceFX 5200 64MB | Integrated Audio | Asus P4S333 SiS645 | Seagate 40GB 7.2KRPM HDD | WIN98SE

 

[jammydodger]

Yeh but if you want faster access times just partition a 80Gb it to 2x40gb partitions.

[Insert witty comment here]

 

[Vapor]

higher data density = faster access times (why 250GB drives are so fast)
OR
more platters = faster access time (one of the reasons why the 74GB raptor is faster than the 36.7GB raptor)

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.