I Need A Second Hard Drive

Joined
Oct 27, 2002
Messages
909
Okay, today is the day that I can actually order my second hard drive as I finally have the money to buy it lol...I was almost toally convinced that I was going to buy a 200GB WDC, until I then put myself in another tricky decision when looking at the 250GB choices...

Basically I thought why not just go for 250GB. I then looked up at 250GB WDC as that would be the next logical choice if not going for their 200GB drive:

Western Digital Caviar Special Edition 250GB 2500JB ATA-100 8MB Cache - £114

But then I had a quick look at the only other possible 250GB hard drive (I think, as Seagate seem to only do 200GB max) and saw that Maxtor's one, the "DiamondMax Plus 10", was actually £8 cheaper and also has 16MB cache:

Maxtor DiamondMax Plus 10 250GB 6B250RO ATA-133 16MB Cache - £106

Now, I think if I shop around I can actually price the 250GB WDC drive to be around the same price as the Maxtor one, but seeing as the Maxtor has double the cache, 16MB, surely it is the better option? To be honest I hadn't even heard of the Diamond Max Plus 10 before, so I don't know what to expect...performance-wise and stuff...

Any suggestions for the better 250GB drive to get? (Thinking about it, I could even consider the 300GB, 16MB drive from Maxtor, but once again I didn't even know that it existed at the moment so definitely not knowing how it performs and compares to other drives.)

Thanks.
 
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=2094&p=6

This article shows a noticable performance increase for having 16MB cache, but of course I doubt it'd be noticable in real-world situations, or at least not most of the time - I could be wrong though. Also that is a review of the SATA version of the drive, so things could be different with PATA drives, although hopefully there wouldn't be much of a performance different at all.

Surely if both 250GB drives (the Western Digital and Maxtor) are priced the same though, 16MB should be better than 8MB?
 
Back
Top