Performance Options

[doubleJ]

Hello...
I'm looking to get a new c:\ and I have 3 main options and I wanted to get opinions for the best performance.
A little history...
I currently have 2x nec 3540 dvd burners and I do cd/dvd duplication with them. I've never had a problem burning 2 at once. I have done so for months from 2 separate 8mb cache 120gb hard drives. I'm looking to upgrade to 4x nec 3550's. In preparation for that, I purchased a hpt370 raid controller. I currently have the 2 afore-mentioned 120's in raid 0, although I haven't used them, yet. Since the nec's are ide, I'll have to use all 4 of my onboards for them, the hpt for the raid0 and sata for my c:\.
Now, what I'm mainly looking at for my c:\ is either a single sata 250gb with 16mb cache, a 36gb raptor, or 2x 80gb with 8mb cache with onboard sata raid0. Basically, all three options are right around $100, which is where I want to keep it (preferrably under $100).
What looks like the best setup for what I'm aiming for? The data being transferred to cd/dvd would be on the 2x 120gb raid0, so this is irrespective of that. Also, size isn't really a concern, as I have the 2x 120gb raid0, already.
JJ
Edit...
Ok, so apparently the 36gb raptor is a bad idea from the hard drive faq, so I'll axe that option. Also, on the 2x 80gb side, I would probably go with the 7200.9 seagate for it's single platter design or the the classic wd800jd.
JJ

 

[unhappy_mage]

The 250 gb single drive, hands down. Faster, more capacity, about the same price, less power draw, less heat generated... what's not to like?

 

[doubleJ]

I'm getting a small [H] graphic on each of those links.
JJ
Edit...
Also, what about the differences between the western digital RE and SE16. The FAQ said that SE16 was pure sata (no bridge), but what about the RE? I like the RE's 5 year warranty.
JJ

 

[DougLite]

The RE (presuming you are talking about the WD4000YR) comes off the same assembly line as the SE16 drive, the WD4000KD. The RE drive is cherry picked, much like FX chips are cherry picked from regular Athlon64 cores, for additional burn-in testing and a longer warranty.

Ask yourself this: If the RAID edition drive was really that much more reliable than the SE16 drive, wouldn't it cost a lot more? Surely WD puts something special into the RE drives to make them more "reliable"? Not really true. As a matter of fact, the SE16 version of the WD4000 is actually _MORE_ expensive on ZZF right now (by about $2) than the RE version. Go figure. The five year warranty on the RE drives is really just a marketing statement, to justify selling them as 'enterprise' nearline drives. The drives are the same for your intents and purposes.