stupid question but like to be answered plz. 32mb or 64mb cache?

[vampelle]

hi As it was easy when i bought my two 250gb some 6 years ago but now, as did not care much details on what i was buying. Have one WD green and one Seagate Barracuda.

but now i would like to know what is the advantage of having 64mb cache then 32 mb cache.

As planning to buy a new HDD. i have found that these drive have different cache. and the price is different too. Toshiba $63, Seagate $63 n WD green $69. But does it matters if having 64 mb cache then 32mb cache. if yes when do u need it.

TOSHIBA DT01ACA100 1TB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive.
Seagate Barracuda ST1000DM003 1TB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive.
Western Digital WD Green WD10EZRX 1TB IntelliPower SATA 64mb cache 6.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive.

strange i couldnt find any review on them too. so if you know any links plz let me know. I would like to see there benchmark n all.

 

[Paperdoc]

In general, a 64 MB cache unit will perform a little faster than one with 32 GB cache, IF other factors are the same. In your specific case:
1. Seagate Barracuda probably a little faster than Toshiba because of cache sizes.
2. WD Green unit likely slower than the others because of rotation speed. Its specs say the speed is "Intellipower" with no number, but these drives typically run about 5400 rpm and adjust speeds a bit according to use. The 64MB cache on this unit helps it perform the best it can, but overall it will be slower than another HDD with the same 64MB cache and a faster rotational speed.

Of these three, the Seagate is likely to be the fastest. However, look on the web for actual performance testing data to see if the difference is significant. Consider also other factors like warranty period and brand and model reputation for reliability.

 

[Kratos47]

WD Green is crap, it runs slow @5400rpm etc and i had to replace 2 of them, even though i only used them for storing purposes. People commend WD Red drives a lot, although i haven't purchased and tested one myself. For storing stuff and low noise you can try Red or stick with green.

Seagate one is the fastest here, although 32\64 mb cache doesn't have much difference.
http://www.harddrivebenchmark.net/high_end_drives.html
Seagate one scores = 1392 points
Tos. DT01ACA100 = 1247 (2TB one*)

Disk buffer has its uses:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disk_buffer#Uses
More here will help in AHCI mode which support NCQ, allowing the user to give multiple commands while the drive is under load. But overall the difference is not that much.

64mb wouldn't make it twice as fast in practicality. Although it can hold twice the amount of data but when the read head is in the right position the size of the buffer matters very little as the data will be streamed immediately from the platter to the buffer and then to the I/O bus at the same rate which marginalizes the buffer.

 

[vampelle]

hmmm i think i will try seagate this time.

Oh i will be using this as my main c ,d , e drive.
As my current c,d is WD green. going better from seagate i have. but its seems wd green is cavair drive and seagate is 8mb cache.

 

[Y0GI]

I have the Seagate ST1000DM003 with 64 MB cache in my system. It is quiet, reliable and very fast! Highly recommended!

Yogi

 

[vampelle]

I have the Seagate ST1000DM003 with 64 MB cache in my system. It is quiet, reliable and very fast! Highly recommended!

Yogi

that what i was thinking it will be. say how do u overclock

 

[manofchalk]

The closest you can get to overclocking a HDD is tweaking the SATA controller. There might be some obscure voodoo magic way of overclocking a HDD, but I dont know of it.

 

[Paperdoc]

I really don't think you can overclock a classic mechanical HDD. Overclocking is usually done by increasing the clock speed of a digital processor system. But on a mechanical HDD, almost ALL of the speed of the system is set by the rotational speed of the platters on the shaft, and you cannot change that.

 

[vampelle]

ok thx.