Samsung F3/WD Black... also quick RAID0 question

[AthlonAlien]

Greetings,

I am looking for a new 1TB hard drive (not a SSD at this time). I have been doing a little research and came to the conclusion that the Samsung F3 and the Western Digital Black are probably the two fastest 7200 RPM drives right now.

I was looking at this Samsung F3 drive on Newegg:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-185-_-Product

It seems as if the F3 possibly edges out this WD Black:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-284-_-Product

But, then I came across this WD Black:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-533-_-Product

It has 64MB of cache (vs. the other drives' 32MB) and is 6.0 Gb/s (vs. 3.0 Gb/s). I assume that if you are using the drive on a typical motherboard that is only SATA 3.0 Gb/s, you probably wouldn't see any performance increase from the 6.0 Gb/s spec, however, I was wondering if the extra cache would make any performance difference?

Also, on a side note. I am moving away from a RAID 0 array (2 x WD Caviar SE16 250GB WD2500KS drives) to one of the single drives above. I know I will be gaining double the space (1TB vs 500GB), however, I am wondering if there are any circumstances where the newer single drive would/could be outperformed by my previous RAID 0 setup?

Here is a link to my previous drives:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822144701

-Thanks​

 

[Corban227]

bump. interested in the answer to these questions

 

[Dangman]

It has 64MB of cache (vs. the other drives' 32MB) and is 6.0 Gb/s (vs. 3.0 Gb/s). I assume that if you are using the drive on a typical motherboard that is only SATA 3.0 Gb/s, you probably wouldn't see any performance increase from the 6.0 Gb/s spec, however, I was wondering if the extra cache would make any performance difference?

Nope. Not that big of a performance difference to justify the costs

Also, on a side note. I am moving away from a RAID 0 array (2 x WD Caviar SE16 250GB WD2500KS drives) to one of the single drives above. I know I will be gaining double the space (1TB vs 500GB), however, I am wondering if there are any circumstances where the newer single drive would/could be outperformed by my previous RAID 0 setup?

AFAIK, no.