[bitmonx]

What would be faster if any of the two? Would be installing Windows 7 64bit.

 

[MasterFire]

500gb RAID0 with what?

 

[Ryanb213]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MasterFire 500gb RAID0 with what?

It looks like two seagates, not sure which model though. from sig

 

[bitmonx]

I bought them 2 years ago. Not sure which kind.....

 

[MasterFire]

Open your devices manager. It should be in there.

 

[bitmonx]

It is a 7200.11, 2MB Cache, 7200RPM, SATA 2

 

[bitmonx]

I guess since the WD HDD has a cache size of 32MB it will be faster than the two Seagate 7200.11 in RAID 0 with only 2MB of cache?

 

[MasterFire]

They don't make 2mb cache 500gb 7200.11's as far as I know. In the device manager does it specify exactly which model (something like ST3500641AS-RK perhaps)?

 

[bitmonx]

I took the drives out of the case just to make sure......

On one drive there is a sticker that says:
Seagate Barracuda, 7200.11, 3.5IN, 500GB SATA2, .5MS 7200RPM, 2MB Cache, NCQ Hard Drive.
The other HDD has no such sticker on it, maybe I removed it or it fell off, but it is the sticker with the "warranty void if removed" warning.

Both drives are identical ones. They are: ST3500320AS, P/N 9BX154-303

According to Newegg the ST3500320AS has a buffer size of 32MB.

So, which will be better still? The two 500GB in RAID 0 or the single 1TB Caviar Black from WD?

 

[MasterFire]

In RAID 0 it should be quicker yes.

 

[ComGuards]

Faster in what sense? What are you doing with your system? A lot of gaming? RAID-0 would be faster with large sequential read & write, but you probably wouldn't notice a huge improvement when dealing with small files and random-access times.

 

[CravinR1]

raid 0 will get better average read speeds

 

[bitmonx]

I am using my PC mostly for gaming.

Thanks all for input

Cheers

 

[buste2]

Hey bitmonx,

I am doing the exact same thing. I am not sure what model HD. I will check when I get home. I have 2x500gb 7200.11 seagate HD's and 2 WD 1tb black's for storage.