Overclock.net banner

Its between these two HDDS, choose one!

633 Views 17 Replies 11 Participants Last post by  Ravin
Ok, for the same price I will either be getting two of these:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822148395
or two of these:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-288-_-Product

Seem to be the same specs except for the cache size. The newer model has 16Mb while the old model has 32Mb. Does the newer model have advantages over the old?
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Between them I'd go for the second one, mostly because of the 32mb cache... if someone else in the same range I'd go for this one http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822136320
  • Rep+
Reactions: 1
Nope. Get the 32 MB cache model.
  • Rep+
Reactions: 1
7200.12 for sure. 500GB platters sure are nice.
  • Rep+
Reactions: 1
Since they are both the same price and same size, you might as well get the 32mb cache, I can't see how it could ever hurt anything.

However, you will probably notice next to 0 difference, real world, between the two.

Also this brings up another point, I believe, someone correct me if I am wrong; but the only noticeable difference that did exist would ONLY be in an ideal situation. The ideal situation being, that there was 0% HDD fragmentation.
  • Rep+
Reactions: 1
Ok, so there is NOT any difference between the two models. So even though the 32Mb cache on is an older model it is the better option. Is that the consensus?

Low Strife said:"7200.12 for sure. 500GB platters sure are nice."
Is there a performance/noise/power improvement because of this?
the 32mb for sure. I have two of that exact model and they work great.
  • Rep+
Reactions: 1
Does anyone know fore sure (proof please) what the difference in performance is between drives of different cache sizes? Also, a benchmark between these two drives would be great. Rep^ to everyone who has helped so far.
HDD Charts

Remember these are most likely under ideal conditions.
Quote:

Originally Posted by EntropyTTU View Post
HDD Charts
Those charts fail to include the hard drive which I am comparing, though they show that the barracuda .11 is a quite fast drive. What I need to know is whether the new revision made it faster or slower.
See less See more
7200.11 which use 250GB and 340GB per plate. Old Firmware.

7200.12 500GB use single platters with 500GB per plate density. New Firmware (CC34) and better acoustics.

Best to go with the 7200.12 if your buying Seagate.
Ok, so it sounds like the bigger platters may be the deciding factor if no one has any input on the cache size. I have always heard that cache size is somewhat irrelevant to performance, but if someone can show me otherwise that would be great.
get the 7200.12s there was a lot of trouble with the 7200.11s bricking and having to be sent in for RMA.
Cache size affects burst speed because it is kind of like the "RAM" of you hard drive, it's just quick access memory. 32mb cache would theoretically be beneficial, but in the long run, having a single 500 gb platter makes it easier and faster for the head to read on the disc, most likely resulting in higher sustained read/write speeds. Also, less platters means a slightly weaker motor necessary to move the platter(s) up to speed, less heads scratching on less platters, and makes for a silent(er?) disc, probably more energy efficient and less hot drive since less friction is going on and less energy is being used to get the drive spinning.

In general, newer = better.
Quote:


Originally Posted by Mr_Nibbles
View Post

Ok, so it sounds like the bigger platters may be the deciding factor if no one has any input on the cache size. I have always heard that cache size is somewhat irrelevant to performance, but if someone can show me otherwise that would be great.

In most cases you will not realize any performance gains
See less See more
2
Get the 7200.12 without reservation between those two. I still think the WD Caviar Black are better, but that is a personal preference. And with regards to the 32MB cache it is nice, but a single 500GB platter will have better continous read/write and should theoretically be more of a stable HD. Burst speeds at times may be a bit higher on the 7200.11 with 32MB Cache, but I have noticed a lot of reviews that were less than stellar for that model. Just so you know there shouldn't be any friction going on as another poster said there may be, and in general temp. will be minimal difference between the two. Lastly the reviews speak soundly of the new 7200.12 model and I tend to think the Newegg reviews tend to reflect fairly accurately of the product in most cases.
Thanks for the input guys, I will be picking up two of the .12's. These will run in raid0 with important files backed up on an external HDD. Also, I will be picking up a Sunbeam Rheobus fan controller.
Quote:


Originally Posted by Mr_Nibbles
View Post

Thanks for the input guys, I will be picking up two of the .12's. These will run in raid0 with important files backed up on an external HDD. Also, I will be picking up a Sunbeam Rheobus fan controller.

Enjoy those drives....I sure do.
See less See more
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top