Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Sata INTERFACE VS RPM VS CACHE

  • 13-02-2013 1:53am
    #1
    multimate
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 417 ✭✭


    I have 2 3.5" drives and am wondering what would be faster

    Drive 1 - WD 160gb
    Sata 2
    7200rpm
    8mb cache

    Drive 2 - seagate 2tb
    Sata 3
    5900 rpm
    64mb cache

    What would be faster, drive 1 as os + drive 2 storage or partition drive 2 for both (also if both drives would that make it significantly louder?


Comments

  • #2
    BloodBath
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,299 ✭✭✭✭BloodBath


    The 2TB would be faster. Larger disks have larger transfer rates as more data can be read per rotation than smaller discs.

    I prefer having my os on a separate drive though so the smaller drive might make a better os drive.

    I'd recommend getting an ssd for your os drive. 60gb+ is loads for the os and most of your backround programs.


Advertisement