Syribo
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2008
- Messages
- 1,515
The 32MB versions are newer, and slightly faster, but not significantly faster. The extra cache helps only a little bit. Platter density would help more, but the new 320GB/platter drives for seagate aren't out yet, IIRC. My Seagate drives tend to run louder than my WDs and Samsungs. The WDs and Samsungs perform on par with the Seagates, but the Seagates have a longer warranty (5yr vs 3yr).
There are some new WD drives out, using the single 320GB platter. They're much faster than previous drives, but unfortunately, hard to find. WD mixed the old stock with new, and the only way to tell the difference is the revision number: WD3200AAKS-00B3A0. No online retailer will guarantee the B3 revision, so its luck of the draw or resort to eBay and pay a premium for such a guarantee. To give you an idea of the speed of the drives, here are some synthetic numbers:
Avg Transfer Rate, Access Time: HDD info, Price I paid (except for raptor - twas a gift)
**note, these figures come from HDTune, a synthetic benchmark for HDDs.
112MB/s, 13.2ms: RAID0 'cuda's, 600GB total, $120 (ICH9R on P35-DS3R)
90MB/s, 16.5ms: WD Caviar SE16 WD3200AAKS-00B3A0, $95 (NEW single 320GB/platter; tested by KenF)
78MB/s, 08.2ms: WD Raptor WD1500ADFD 150GB, $160
76MB/s, 13.7ms: WD Caviar SE16 WD7500AAKS 750GB, $150
72MB/s, 15.4ms: Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 ST3250410AS 250GB, $65
68MB/s, 13.3ms: Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 ST3320620AS 320GB, $60
63MB/s, 13.4ms: WD Caviar SE16 WD5000AAKS 500GB, $100
62MB/s, 15.3ms: Samsung HD501LJ 500GB, $105
52MB/s, 14.0ms: WD Caviar SE16 WD2500KS 250GB, $70
Hmm.. I wonder where the SG Barracuda 7200.11 comes in on that chart? I don't know what to choose
What would you choose?