Why WD's with 16mb cache are better than Seagate's HDDs 32mb cache?

[Isaac MM]

So i have been asking around what hard drives people recommend and almost all of them told me to get this one http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136218&Tpk=640gb%2bwestern%2bdigital

But there are hard drives from Seagate that have 32mb cache for about the same price or lower why people dont recommend them?

[zanzabar]

that much cash dosnt make a difference, and while 32MB may seam better larger cash ushualy is slower and since u wont be utilizing 32MB why do it. and that WD has 2x 320GB platers thats why its recommended they are the only ones shipping those and unless u want solid data storage for like 5 years constant use it wont give u problems, normal use those are better than raptors for most things


and seagate makes shotty drives IMO since they got maxtor their quality has been going down, look at samsung if u dont like WD, every1 i know doing data base storage uses f1 drives or hitatchi ultra stars as temporary backups they wouldent touch a seagate or WD

[Yukon Trooper]

Cache isn't as important as the way the drives are designed. Just because a car has a bigger engine doesn't always mean it will go faster than the competition.

[markymoo]

Firmware can make a difference. WD found 16MB was better than using 32MB.

[cantankerous]

I would personally recommend the Samsung or the Hitachi myself.

[MikeB12]

the wd caviars are pretty slow compared to the samsung spinpoints and seagate 7200.11's...

imo, I'd go with one of samsung's spinpoint series...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=Property&Subcategory=14&Description=&Type=&N=2010150014+50001077&srchInDesc=&MinPrice=&MaxPrice=&Manufactory=1077&PropertyCodeValue=359%3A15133&PropertyCodeValue=353%3A20984&PropertyCodeValue=353%3A35532&PropertyCodeValue=353%3A7886&PropertyCodeValue=355%3A7776&PropertyCodeValue=354%3A24340&PropertyCodeValue=354%3A7760&PropertyCodeValue=360%3A7800

or seagates 7200.11 series
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Description=7200.11&x=0&y=0

I have a 500gb 7200.11 that's pretty decent... and I know many people complain about quality as you've seen in this thread. but mine has been going strong since oct, and I record about 200gb/week through my ati650 tv card and it's been cycling through that everyweek for 7 months... plus all my other data... so figure it's seen about 6-8TB move through it since oct, and it's still going strong...

here's a HDTach of it and a NE link http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148288
Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 ST3500320AS 500GB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive - OEM
http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/1660/93831477ne0.jpg


but here's a techreport on a bunch of hd's if you want a comparison of quite a few popular drives.
http://techreport.com/articles.x/14380/13
notice spinpoint and 7200.11 is near the top of most tests... and caviar doesn't do so well...

I have a 250gb caviar in one of my folders and it does fine, but if you're looking for performance, there are better alternatives to spend your money on..

[Ender17]

the wd caviars are pretty slow compared to the samsung spinpoints and seagate 7200.11's...

imo, I'd go with one of samsung's spinpoint series...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=Property&Subcategory=14&Description=&Type=&N=2010150014+50001077&srchInDesc=&MinPrice=&MaxPrice=&Manufactory=1077&PropertyCodeValue=359%3A15133&PropertyCodeValue=353%3A20984&PropertyCodeValue=353%3A35532&PropertyCodeValue=353%3A7886&PropertyCodeValue=355%3A7776&PropertyCodeValue=354%3A24340&PropertyCodeValue=354%3A7760&PropertyCodeValue=360%3A7800

or seagates 7200.11 series
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Description=7200.11&x=0&y=0

I have a 500gb 7200.11 that's pretty decent... and I know many people complain about quality as you've seen in this thread. but mine has been going strong since oct, and I record about 200gb/week through my ati650 tv card and it's been cycling through that everyweek for 7 months... plus all my other data... so figure it's seen about 6-8TB move through it since oct, and it's still going strong...

here's a HDTach of it and a NE link http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148288
Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 ST3500320AS 500GB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive - OEM
[img]http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/1660/93831477ne0.jpg/img]


but here's a techreport on a bunch of hd's if you want a comparison of quite a few popular drives.
http://techreport.com/articles.x/14380/13
notice spinpoint and 7200.11 is near the top of most tests... and caviar doesn't do so well...

I have a 250gb caviar in one of my folders and it does fine, but if you're looking for performance, there are better alternatives to spend your money on..

did you read that tech report link?
the WD6400AAKS blows away every drive except the samsung and is given an editor's choice award
seagate drives are loud and slow, they simply can't compete with these new wd and samsung drives

[MikeB12]

did you read that tech report link?
the WD6400AAKS blows away every drive except the samsung and is given an editor's choice award
seagate drives are loud and slow, they simply can't compete with these new wd and samsung drives

my bad, I was looking at the old 250gb like my old one in my cruncher... it's way down on the list.. not the newer 640gb, which was near the top...

to set the record straight here's the charts from what you were referring to in the article...

http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/1000/57664078sz4.jpg
http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/6915/91333037eb6.jpg
http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/4004/92165689il1.jpg