A "This or That" Question

S

six_storm

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 29, 2005
Messages
1,251
I know this is probably a stupid question, but I just wanted to get a second opinion on my next HDD purchase. SSD is still way too expensive at the moment and I would rather wait until my next build to dive into it. So, I'm going to be replacing a 4 year old 250GB Western Digital SATA HDD with some sort of a Western Digital Black Drive.

My choices are of the following:

Option 1:

2x Western Digital Black 500GB HDDs and put them in a RAID 0.

Price - $137

Option 2:

1x Western Digital Black 750GB HDD.

Price - $97

Here is my question: which one would be the best "bang for my buck" when it comes to a slightly older machine? My current build is:

Intel Q6600 Quad Core
Gigabyte Mobo
4GB of DDR2 RAM
MSI NVIDIA 260GTX 216-Core
1x 250GB - Current System Drive
1x 160GB - Linux/Goof Drive
1x 1TB - Storage (Music, Movies, Software Backup ISOs)
1x 1TB - Backup Only (External)

Would I really see a huge performance difference with 2 HDDs in RAID 0 over just one WD Black HDD? I'm just looking for the best way to spend my money. Thanks for the replies in advance guys.
 
Last edited:
Are you going with the WD Black 500GB drives there?
 
six_storm said:
I'm heavily considering the first option.
Click to expand...
Ditch the Blacks. They have not been confirmed to be of single platter design. The WD 500GB Blue however has been confirmed to be of single platter design and is significantly faster than the current Black stats:

$56 - Western Digital WD5000AAKS 500GB 7200RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive
 
Danny Bui said:
Ditch the Blacks. They have not been confirmed to be of single platter design. The WD 500GB Blue however has been confirmed to be of single platter design and is significantly faster than the current Black stats:

$56 - Western Digital WD5000AAKS 500GB 7200RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive
Click to expand...

Single platter is faster huh?

Notleh said:
Neither.

The 1TB is $78 (coupon EMCYWZP29 for 5 more hours) and smokes all of them. Raid 2 of those if you are feeling froggy.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136284&cm_re=caviar_black-_-22-136-284-_-Product


However, if it was me, I would go with the Samsung Spinpoint F3. Faster than the WD Caviar black and at $60 a MUCH better deal.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822152185&cm_re=spinpoint_f3-_-22-152-185-_-Product
Click to expand...

I don't need a lot of space (I have plenty) so I thought 500GB drives would be perfect.


Wirth'sLaw said:
Why don't get some RE3's and run a raid?
Click to expand...

500GB RE3 drives are only 16MB cache, but why are they more expensive? Sorry I don't know much about hard drives, I just haven't had the time to research that much.
 
Last edited:
Single platter is faster huh?
Click to expand...

500GB platter is faster than 333GB platter however there are announcements of 666GB platters coming out very soon. One drive will have a 3 platter 2TB drive.

http://www.storagereview.com/samsung_f4eg_ecogreen_announced

However since this is a 5400 RPM drive it will not be noted for speed still probably faster than the 7200 RPM 333GB platter drives since it is 2 times the density.
 
Those Samsung F3s are pretty tempting, I can get two of those for right at $120. The more I read about them, they seem to outperform the WD drives.
 
I bought 2 Samsung F3 drives 500GB a piece.

Now here is the important question of the day: Can I use Windows 7 Backup/Restore OR Acronis TI to clone or restore from my single 250GB HDD to those 2 Samsungs in a RAID 0?

EDIT: NM, I'm a dumbass that can't read his own Mobo specs. My mobo doesn't support RAID . . . .

But I guess an answer to the question wouldn't hurt either. Good to have that knowledge.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top