New hard disk - seeking opinions

Forums › Desktop computing › New hard disk - seeking opinions

engrrehan

4 posts

Wannabe Geek
Inactive user

#33504 7-May-2009 04:54

hi

i would like to buy a hard disk .

i have chosen two hard disk
1. WD 500GB 5001AALS 32MB CAVIAR BLACK 32MB CACHE
and
2.500 GB SATA II (NCQ 3GB/S (16MB CACHE) + SATA POWER CABLE

i request you to tell me which hard disk is good keeping in view its average performance.

if both are not ok then what will be the choice should be.

what will be eminent differece between two harddisk one 32 Mb ,other with 16Mb cache.

zocster

1994 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 105

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#213005 7-May-2009 06:21

I have always either used Western Digital or Seagate, IMO they're best

garvani

1873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 83

Trusted

#213020 7-May-2009 08:34

This is an easy choice. Go for the first one.. 500gb Western Digital Caviar Black 32MB CACHE. The 32mb cache will serve you well, and has added performance gains over the 2nd choice with a 16mb cache.

Ragnor

8279 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 585

Trusted

#213258 7-May-2009 18:32

Samsung Spinpoint F1 1TB imo

http://www.silentpcreview.com/article843-page1.html
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/storage/2008/12/09/samsung-spinpoint-f1-1tb/7

Satch

1985 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 259

#213265 7-May-2009 18:50

Ragnor: Samsung Spinpoint F1 1TB imo

http://www.silentpcreview.com/article843-page1.html
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/storage/2008/12/09/samsung-spinpoint-f1-1tb/7

I second this completely. I've got 3 Samsung Spinpoint F1's in my HTPC and they have never caused me any issues.

paradoxsm

3000 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#213268 7-May-2009 18:53

500GB, go tot full 1TB+. I put in a 250GB drive for my multi-OS boot and felt like I was seriously stinging it.

1TB would be the bare minimum I'd go for now and yes go for that bigger cache, I remember when I went to 16MB cache, file transfers were much faster.