[Hard Drives] Importance of Cache?

[dc72]

I currently have a Seagate ST3500630AS 500GB Hard Drive SATAII 16MB Cache as my main OS drive, and a Maxtor STM3500320AS 500GB Hard Drive SATAII 7200rpm 32MB Cache as my main storage drive. I intend to switch this at my next fresh install so the OS drive has access to the extra cache.

I've been looking at adding another 500Gb or 750Gb drive to my existing 1Tb of storage. I was initially going to go with a Seagate ST3500320AS 500GB 32MB cache, but I've spotted 750Gb drives for not much more than the 500Gb. Only thing is one is these drives (£12 more than the 500GB) has 8MB and the other (a further £10 more) 16MB cache respectively.

Since this drive is primarily going to be for storage purposes of files I won't be using every day, is it going to make a huge difference if I have an 8MB, 16MB or 32MB cache on it? Also the model with 8MB cache doesn't have NCQ, but the 16MB cache model does.

Is it worth paying the extra for more cache on what's going to be a storage drive, or am I looking at a false sense of economy by skimping?

Any advice appreciated and especially so if you can explain and qualify it with information or links. Thanks in advance.

[Lucio]

AFAIK the cache will affect the performance of a drive running programs, because the larger the cache, the more information can be pulled off the disc and kept in the cache for faster access. That said, with many modern applications they decide to make the files all far too large to fit into any HDD cache.


Since you're going for just a storage drive, it shouldn't make much difference. The files you're likely to be storing will probably be bigger than even the largest cache, so it offers no major advantages to your access times.

[Lourdes]

HDD cache makes little difference, especially not if you're just using it for storage. The cache/buffer is used to read ahead, buffer before writes and to queue things. It can be advantageous in situations where you're writing heavily so for plain storage there's no advantage.

By the way have a look at the Samsung F1 750GB's, Seagate are loud, slow and expensive in comparison.

[dc72]

I've read too many stories about the Samsung drives failing I'm afraid. Loads of them in the comments on ebuyer. Plus they only have a three year manufacturers warranty...I get five with Seagate, so I don't mind paying a bit extra for that kind of piece of mind.

Much appreciate the advice about the relevance of cache to a storage drive. Think I'll go ahead and get the 16MB mid-range model in case I decide to use the drive in another capacity in future. It's only a tenner more compared to £30 more for the 32MB cache version. I guess people really want that extra cache...