16mb cache SATA or 8mb SATAII for hard drives

[kalniel]

Which is likely to make the most difference? More cache, or SATAII?

Thanks,

[zulander]

tuff one, drives cant really make the full use of sata II speeds at the moment, so cache may be more important right now. Thats said once drives reach the full potential of sata or sata II then go for that, just my view and im sure so one probably has benchmarks to give a better indication

[Hans Voralberg]

Have a look at this
http://www.cluboverclocker.com/revie...i/T7K250/2.htm

It nearly touch the speed limit of SATA so i guess to be a bit futureproof a SATAII would be a better decision.

[Butcher]

Um it does 68MB/s at best. That's not "nearly touching" SATA speeds in the slightest.
I'd go with the 16MB cache drive.

[Nox]

I see 133MB/s burst which is 17MB/s off the sata cap - nearly touching? yeah, close enough in my books.

Admitedly, this will be off the onboard cache, but i'd still say get the T7K250.

Nox

[Thorsson]

Have Hitachi overcome the reliability problems with their drives? What's the warranty like?

[Nox]

Hitachi had a reliability problem? I knew IBM did.

I believe they are 3 years off the top of my head.

Nox

[Hans Voralberg]

Been using them for years without a problem. Realiable stuff.

[Butcher]

I see 133MB/s burst which is 17MB/s off the sata cap - nearly touching? yeah, close enough in my books.

Admitedly, this will be off the onboard cache, but i'd still say get the T7K250.

Nox

Buying a drive for performance that you achieve less than 1% of the time seems misguided if you ask me.
The hitachis are nice drives though.

[Nox]

I think its about time WD brought out a new raptor - the 7200 rpm drives are certainly closing the gap. 2+ years ago, I swore by raptors, but now... I really cannot see the performance increase for the premium they are and don't think I could recommend them over a decent 7.2k rpm but I still use mine. Its a shame storage review have never done a T7K250.

Nox

[OmarSantiago]

I agree, WD have been relying on the Raptor for too long as their BFG and need to bring a new one out soon sp I can succumb to peer pressure and buy some more. Menawhile I've taken delivery of 2 Maxtor Maxline III drives with 16MB cache and NCQ and to the naked eye it almost stacks up to Raptors in terms of raw speed in a RAID 0 array: the Raptor winning out in boot-up times and level loading for HL2. I'm keeping my Raptors as my boot array but will adopt the MaxLine III for apps as well as storage (going from 74Gb to 250 is disconcerting: I'm so used to conserving space the drive is almost empty now). Did I mention they're quiet?

Okay, I admit it's not a professional review but this is.

I like it

[darrensen]

Get the best of both worlds!!

250Gb Maxtor Maxline III 24x7 Reliability (7200rpm,16MB) SATA II NCQ - Lead (Pb) Free

[kalniel]

Hehe, I can't afford the best of both worlds My world is a world of compromise.. I just try to minimize the impact.

[BubbySoup]

I'd go for the 16Mb SATA drive.

As someone already said, that 133MB/s burst speed is not important in the large scheme of things.

[Nox]

nope, but i'd* still rate the T7K250 higher than any other 7.2k rpm drive at the moment. But.. the current gen are all so close, I really don't think anyone will really notice a great deal of difference.

Nox

*from reviews i've read

[xms]

16mb cache. SataII isn't needed yet. Drives need to improve their internal transfer rates a lot before they even use Sata bandwidth