Barracuda 32MB Cache VS Caviar Black 64MB Cache

[deadpoet]

Hello to everybody.

I recently bought a new computer whose HDD is a Seagate ST31000524AS Barracuda 7200.12 SATA 6Gb/s 1 TB (Specs

here: http://www.seagate.com/staticfiles/support/docs/100636864b.pdf )

However, I previously owned a Western Digital Caviar Black WD1002FAEX SATA 6Gb/s 1 TB HDD (Specs here:

http://www.wdc.com/wdproducts/library/SpecSheet/ENG/2879-771434.pdf )

The Barracuda has 32 MB cache while the Caviar Black has 64 MB cache.

My questions are: Do you reckon that the Caviar Black is a better performing HDD? Do you reckon it will be worth to substitute the Baracuda with the Caviar Black?

Davide

 

[popatim]

Both those drive are almost exactly the same speed: 125mb/s for the seagate and 126 for the WD. I doubt you would see any performance gains from the WD's extra cache outside of benchmarks.

 

[deadpoet]

I doubt you would see any performance gains from the WD's extra cache outside of benchmarks.

Are you sure about this?

Here are some tests I ran on the both of them: