Which Hard Drive should I pick?

911aaron · 05-16-2008, 01:30 AM

Which hard drive should i choose?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822148288

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822136073

I like the seagate one because it has 32mb cache while the WD one has only 16mb cache. However the ratings on the seagate are concerning me. Which one do you think I should choose?

(what does more cache do anyways? I know its good to have more cache but I dont know what it does. lol

)

PC eye · 05-16-2008, 01:51 AM

I've been running two of the WD models for over a year now having moved those and one of two ide drives into a newer build. Now with the ide drive gone the pair see XP on one and Vista on the other as well as ubuntu.

The 32mb cache is always a plus and Seagate is another good brand there. Either will see about 465gb after the initial partitioning and formatting of the drive selected. I've been running WD drives for over 10yrs. at this time without one failure except for one loaned out where the owner neglected to maintain the case and the drive overheated!

Other then that price is the only other concern seeing the $10 difference. The cache is actually more of a memory buffer where the microcontroller on the drive will signal the main system that data has been written to the drive's platters while still being held in memory so that the system can continue on.

voyagerfan99 · 05-16-2008, 02:31 AM

I heard that HDD's don't even use all 32 MB of cache, so theres no point in having it so big. They only use like 12 MB I believe.

911aaron · 05-16-2008, 02:36 AM

I see... So what do you think would be a better choice? I think its basically a choice between speed or quality. (seagate being the speed and western digital being the quality) (I know seagate has great quality products but if you look at the ratings this one got compared to the WD, seems like the WD has the better quality in this scenario.)

Cleric7x9 · 05-16-2008, 02:53 AM

to be honest, i think that both of those drives are great, and its really a toss up. for only $10 more the seagate is probably quieter, but idk how much you would really notice it

PC eye · 05-16-2008, 02:55 AM

I've seen great results running a pair of the exact same WD model here with both seeing one version of Windows on. XP still needs a large primary for working with video captures at times while Vista has been set as the default for some time. Seagate would be the alternative brand when looking at the others seen. And they never even make a sound.

911aaron · 05-16-2008, 03:05 AM

ill get the WD. thanks

StrangleHold · 05-16-2008, 03:10 AM

The Seagate hands down, if you want a W/D drive dont get a SE model get this one.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822136205

SirKenin · 05-16-2008, 03:16 AM

lol. The WD SE is a total piece of crap for anything but the lightest of duties.. If anyone tries to steer you otherwise, chances are good they have little or no actual experience.. Take it for what it's worth.. absolutely nothing.

I can tell you a ton of stories about crap WD drives. They really are that bad. Get the Seagate and thank us later.

PC eye · 05-16-2008, 03:31 AM

The pair of AAKS 500gb drives are running quite well thank you! I've used SE models as well for several years on various builds as well as others have found them reliable even when placing good loads on them. But as usual the peanut gallery has to come in and make some noise. You don't have to spend an extra $20 to see a WD work out there.

05-16-2008, 01:30 AM	#1 (permalink)
911aaron Silver Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Inside your computer as a virus Posts: 196	Which Hard Drive should I pick? Which hard drive should i choose? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822148288 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822136073 I like the seagate one because it has 32mb cache while the WD one has only 16mb cache. However the ratings on the seagate are concerning me. Which one do you think I should choose? (what does more cache do anyways? I know its good to have more cache but I dont know what it does. lol ) __________________ * Processor: Intel core 2 Quad Q6600 * Mobo: GIGABYTE GA-P35-DS3L * RAM: G. Skill 2GB F2-6400CL5d-2GBNQ * Hard Drive: Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 ST3250410AS 250GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s * VGA: EVGA 256-P2-N751-TR GeForce 8600GT 256MB 128-bit GDDR3 * PSU: Ultra X-Finity 500-Watt * OS: Windows XP Home Edition 32-bit * Monitor: Samsung 906BW LCD 2 ms response time 2000:1 Contrast *CPU cooler: Arctic Cooler 7

05-16-2008, 02:31 AM	#3 (permalink)
voyagerfan99 Diamond Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Connecticut/New Jersey, USA Age: 18 Posts: 3,712	I heard that HDD's don't even use all 32 MB of cache, so theres no point in having it so big. They only use like 12 MB I believe. __________________ Mach Speed MSNV-939 nForce Socket 939 AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ (OC'd to 2.20 Ghz) Power Up Black ATX Mid-T Case w/700W & Clear Side 4 GB DDR PC3200 RAM/Logitech MX Revolution Mouse 690 GB Storage (320S-ATA, 120-ATA, 250-SATA) Asus HD4870DK 1GB 22" Viewsonic LCD w/ iPod Dock + 22" ASUS Logitech G15 Keyboard/G51 Seakers Computer Pics

05-16-2008, 02:36 AM	#4 (permalink)
911aaron Silver Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Inside your computer as a virus Posts: 196	I see... So what do you think would be a better choice? I think its basically a choice between speed or quality. (seagate being the speed and western digital being the quality) (I know seagate has great quality products but if you look at the ratings this one got compared to the WD, seems like the WD has the better quality in this scenario.) __________________ * Processor: Intel core 2 Quad Q6600 * Mobo: GIGABYTE GA-P35-DS3L * RAM: G. Skill 2GB F2-6400CL5d-2GBNQ * Hard Drive: Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 ST3250410AS 250GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s * VGA: EVGA 256-P2-N751-TR GeForce 8600GT 256MB 128-bit GDDR3 * PSU: Ultra X-Finity 500-Watt * OS: Windows XP Home Edition 32-bit * Monitor: Samsung 906BW LCD 2 ms response time 2000:1 Contrast *CPU cooler: Arctic Cooler 7

05-16-2008, 02:53 AM	#5 (permalink)
Cleric7x9 Diamond Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Palm Beach, FL Age: 24 Posts: 2,312	to be honest, i think that both of those drives are great, and its really a toss up. for only $10 more the seagate is probably quieter, but idk how much you would really notice it __________________ Dell Studio XPS 16 Notebook p8600 2.4Ghz 4Gb DDR3 1066Mhz RAM 128GB Samsung SSD ATI Radeon Mobility 3670 512Mb 16" 1920x1080 RGBLED LCD Backlit keyboard Windows 7 Professional x64 RTM

05-16-2008, 03:05 AM	#7 (permalink)
911aaron Silver Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Inside your computer as a virus Posts: 196	ill get the WD. thanks __________________ * Processor: Intel core 2 Quad Q6600 * Mobo: GIGABYTE GA-P35-DS3L * RAM: G. Skill 2GB F2-6400CL5d-2GBNQ * Hard Drive: Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 ST3250410AS 250GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s * VGA: EVGA 256-P2-N751-TR GeForce 8600GT 256MB 128-bit GDDR3 * PSU: Ultra X-Finity 500-Watt * OS: Windows XP Home Edition 32-bit * Monitor: Samsung 906BW LCD 2 ms response time 2000:1 Contrast *CPU cooler: Arctic Cooler 7

05-16-2008, 01:51 AM	#2 (permalink)
PC eye banned Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 21,091	I've been running two of the WD models for over a year now having moved those and one of two ide drives into a newer build. Now with the ide drive gone the pair see XP on one and Vista on the other as well as ubuntu. The 32mb cache is always a plus and Seagate is another good brand there. Either will see about 465gb after the initial partitioning and formatting of the drive selected. I've been running WD drives for over 10yrs. at this time without one failure except for one loaned out where the owner neglected to maintain the case and the drive overheated! Other then that price is the only other concern seeing the $10 difference. The cache is actually more of a memory buffer where the microcontroller on the drive will signal the main system that data has been written to the drive's platters while still being held in memory so that the system can continue on.

05-16-2008, 02:55 AM	#6 (permalink)
PC eye banned Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 21,091	I've seen great results running a pair of the exact same WD model here with both seeing one version of Windows on. XP still needs a large primary for working with video captures at times while Vista has been set as the default for some time. Seagate would be the alternative brand when looking at the others seen. And they never even make a sound.

05-16-2008, 03:10 AM	#8 (permalink)
StrangleHold VIP Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 11,174	The Seagate hands down, if you want a W/D drive dont get a SE model get this one. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822136205 __________________ NZXT Apollo S75QB 750W ZEROtherm FZ120 Phenom II 720BE (X4) 3.5GHZ. Gigabyte GA MA790X UD4P G Skill DDR2 1066 4GB. MSI GTS 250 Seagate 7200.12 500GB. Welcome to the show

05-16-2008, 03:16 AM	#9 (permalink)
SirKenin banned Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 4,711	lol. The WD SE is a total piece of crap for anything but the lightest of duties.. If anyone tries to steer you otherwise, chances are good they have little or no actual experience.. Take it for what it's worth.. absolutely nothing. I can tell you a ton of stories about crap WD drives. They really are that bad. Get the Seagate and thank us later.

05-16-2008, 03:31 AM	#10 (permalink)
PC eye banned Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 21,091	The pair of AAKS 500gb drives are running quite well thank you! I've used SE models as well for several years on various builds as well as others have found them reliable even when placing good loads on them. But as usual the peanut gallery has to come in and make some noise. You don't have to spend an extra $20 to see a WD work out there.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Slave hard drive not working properly.	Gtrance	Computer Memory and Hard Drives	3	01-21-2009 10:31 PM
Hard Drive shows less space then availble	Billy Adams	Computer Memory and Hard Drives	5	01-24-2007 05:20 AM
Installing a new hard drive with multiple os'es	Ghostnotes	Computer Memory and Hard Drives	5	01-03-2007 02:38 PM
Compaq mother board again	exopforce	Motherboards	15	09-29-2006 02:05 AM
New Box...want to use existing hard drive and windows	Nightrain	Desktop Computers	4	09-14-2006 01:28 AM