external hard drive, 5400 vs. 7200 rpm/2mb cache cache rpm/8mb [portal site] [maxtor]

Q: So, bought this disc a few weeks ago: WD 250 gig external (http://www.westerndigital.com/en/products/products.asp?DriveID=79)

I not yet opened, so that I could still return it.

Now Im thinking about picking up this site: 300 gig external (http://www..com/portal/site//?epi_menuItemID=ba88f6d7cf664718376049b291346068u0026amp e = pi_menuID 976d37cd478c5826433f226075b46068 u0026amp; epi_bas eMenuID = 976d37cd478c5826433f226075b46068 u0026amp; channelpa th = / en_US / Products / External 20Hard 20Drives/OneTouch 20Family/%%%%% 20OneTouch 20FireWire% 20and% 20USB u0026amp; productvi ew = specifications)

The is cheaper, has more storage, but with 50g 5400rpm 2MB cache.

Any advice?


Small Site Seller
Re:go for the 300GB, I have a 250GB 5400rpm external, and since it's used for backups and movies, no reason to buy a 7200rpm.

Astrolabio.NET – Portal for Hispanic
Re:USB has more bandwidth but its still lower due to the protocol. USB has lots of error correction,thats why its great for so much plug and play. firwire has no error correction and just runs all out using every drop of the bandwidth for the task at hand. thats why its only meant for point to point connections,no hubs,etc.

i'd get the slower cheap hard drive. it will always be limited by the interface anyhow. also seek times from the higher RPMs are useless since its only for backup.


Web Site Promotion.
Re:Originally posted by: guy

The lists max sustained transfer rates of the drive as 34MBps for USB2.0 and 41MBps for IEEE… which is odd since USB 2.0 is a faster interface.
Actually, I've read quite a bit saying that Firewire is actually a bit quicker in the real world.

and what you've been reading is most definitely correct. it also yields lower cpu utilization.

if you're not using the drive to run actual applications, then the slower 300gb is perfect.


Niche Site Domination
Re:The lists max sustained transfer rates of the drive as 34MBps for USB2.0 and 41MBps for IEEE… which is odd since USB 2.0 is a faster interface.
Actually, I've read quite a bit saying that Firewire is actually a bit quicker in the real world.

Free CB Portal
Re:Interface Speeds:
USB 1.1: 12 Mbps –> 1.5MBps
IEEE 1394: 400 Mbps –> 50MBps
USB 2.0: 480 Mbps –> 60MBps
ATA100: 100 MBps

The lists max sustained transfer rates of the drive as 34MBps for USB2.0 and 41MBps for IEEE… which is odd since USB 2.0 is a faster interface. WD follows in the continued traditon of most HDD manufacturers by not listing any valuable information on their hard drives. (In this case, the max, min, and average sectors per track to allow us to calculate the actual transfer rates.) But we know that the servo type on the R/W head is embedded in the drive (!!!).

In any case, the transfer rate is nowhere near the theoretical maximum for the interface speeds, so it reasonable to assume the 7200/8MB WD drive will be slightly faster (unless you're using USB 1.1, in which case the interface speed is limiting your transfer rate).

However, also keep in mind that you're using the drive primarily for backup purposes. That means you're also going to be limited by the bandwidths of the internal HDD, which will probably be close to or less than those of the WD, and maybe as low as the . Also, for a backup device you're generally more concerned with capacity than speed.

I'd go with the 300GB.

And, as always, keep in mind that "300 GB" means "300,000,000,000 bytes," which will show up as ~280 GiB in Windows. Similarly, the "250 GB" drive will show up as ~233GiB in Windows.


Site Warder – Site Monitoring Script
Re:Thanks—planning on returning the w-d if possible.

I cannot imagine needing all 300gigs for backups (since I'm just backing up the boot drive for 3 computers and my wifes 40gig laptop drive) but I'm sure someday that all 300 will come in handy.


Build a Coupon Site
Re:i'd go for the for 2 reasons

1. cheaper
2. 50 more gigs

even though its a bit slower you're only using it for backing up data.. not using it on a daily bases
your gonna spend hours unloading/packing 300gig anyways the 5400 vs 7200 isnt gonna be a huge deal


Related posts

Leave a comment

0 Comments.

Leave a Reply


click to changeSecurity Code

[ Ctrl + Enter ]