HDD Dilema!

[oldskooladdict]

I have a copy of Windows 7 due to arrive very soon, I've decided to install this on a new HDD.

Ideally this would have been a ssd based on the performance gains, however, I just ca't justify 180 quid for 64gb.

So, I've had to resort to classic HDDs - the recommendation I got were

Caviar Black or Barracuda 7200.12 basically.

So, firstly, do you agree that it's between these two?

Secondly, which would you go for - capacity and cache being identical?

Thirdly, would there be a noticeable benefit of having 32mb cache vs 16mb cache

I should point out:
1. I don't game
2. I don't edit video
3. I don't care about power consumption or noise in this situation
4. I don't need anything massive - this will be OS only, not media

So, help me decide people!!

[Ulti]

I'd say the choice is more between Caviar Black and the Samsung F3s in this case. If you're willing to spend a lil more you could go for something like a VelociRaptor. However the extra cost doesn't seem like it'd be worth it for the VelociRaptors.

I'd heard many good things about the Samsung F3s but I haven't used one upfront myself so I don't know how good they are exactly. I've only used WD too so I can't compare them with others but I'm gonna get a Samsung F3 drive too but not for a month or two so sorry I can't help you anymore than this.

[Blaineoliver]

F3s are very quick.

[watercooled]

+1 for a Samsung F3.

[Champman99]

I think I'm going to get an F3 for my new Windows 7 install as well. I'm thinking of a 3*1GB F3's in Raid5, can have 2GB of fast, secure storage for the same price as a pretty small capacity SSD.

Ive read such nice things about SSDs, but I like my storage, and I cant afford both!

[oldskooladdict]

Never heard of the F3, I have a spinpoint 1TB drive and I wasn't overly impressed with it - it makes some odd noises at times compared to my other drives and failed the seatools drive test too! (My colleagues Spinpoint passed!). It's been ok (touch wood) but I wasn't overly impressed since it's had so much decent press.

[Ulti]

I've heard the F1s were kind of a "failure" but Samsung went to work and got the awesome F3s out and now it seems they're at the top. Too bad they don't have F3 160/250GB versions as I don't really need another 500GB at all but yet I want to buy one to see how fast they are.

[nightkhaos]

I think I'm going to get an F3 for my new Windows 7 install as well. I'm thinking of a 3*1GB F3's in Raid5, can have 2GB of fast, secure storage for the same price as a pretty small capacity SSD.

Ive read such nice things about SSDs, but I like my storage, and I cant afford both!

I didn't know F3s came in in 1GB varients.

Further more the RAID 5 performance loss is noticeable. You will get insane burst speeds (around 200MB/s) but the moment you saturate your caches you will drop down to about 40MB/s. Now consider and independent drive can do around 110MB/s and a RAID 0 around 115 MB/s, I would consider this to not be worth the cost.

[shaithis]

Further more the RAID 5 performance loss is noticeable. You will get insane burst speeds (around 200MB/s) but the moment you saturate your caches you will drop down to about 40MB/s. Now consider and independent drive can do around 110MB/s and a RAID 0 around 115 MB/s, I would consider this to not be worth the cost.

40MB/s? Maybe if you have a really bad setup. Look at my sig.....check the minimum speed.

The real differences with RAID5 to be wary of is write speed. Your read speeds will always be really good but your write speeds will prodominantly be slower then a single drive.

Depending on how much data you read and write, RAID5's value will fluctuate.

[nightkhaos]

40MB/s? Maybe if you have a really bad setup. Look at my sig.....check the minimum speed.

The real differences with RAID5 to be wary of is write speed. Your read speeds will always be really good but your write speeds will prodominantly be slower then a single drive.

Depending on how much data you read and write, RAID5's value will fluctuate.

I was referring to write speeds my friend. Also I was talking real-world performance. I get barely 35MB/s write to my RAID 5 array, but read, well that's just crazy. 160MB/s iirc, and that's with EcoDrive F2s.

[Zak33]

Ideally this would have been a ssd based on the performance gains, however, I just ca't justify 180 quid for 64gb.

http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/64GB-...-Write-200MB-s

64 gig SSD for £125 inc vat.

And that's gonna be plenty of speed and size for a Windows 7 install.

(note to ALL the HEXUS regular's... did you notice how I managed not to pimp the Hitachi SATA 1Tb drives? )

[oldskooladdict]

Ach, that makes me more tempted. Another forum (I know the cheek!) that I asked on a few weeks ago recommended some OCZ drives which I found to be about 180.

The post its self did trigger some very strong opinions on SSDs in general to be honest, and not all were singing their praises. This makes me think I should wait a little while until they are more common and any gripes are ironed out.

Very tempted by a Caviar Black now, firstly, I've never owned a WD drive (lol) and the Sammy I have I'm not overly impressed with, I used to swear by Seagates but I've had nothing but problems on a portable one I have.

So, perhaps it's time to give WD a go.

[oldskooladdict]

Also, on a slight aside - if I just plug in this new drive (when I get it!) and put in the W7 CD I assume I can choose to install it on that drive and all is good...

How can I keep the existing Vista drive plugged in too - and get a boot menu so I can choose between the two?

[nightkhaos]

(note to ALL the HEXUS regular's... did you notice how I managed not to pimp the Hitachi SATA 1Tb drives? )

And yet you had to add this comment to make it known that you didn't, thus invalidating the point.