8MB Cache vs. ATA133

[SpookyVBA]

I am thinking about getting a RAID 0 Array for more performance. I am a Office XP Power User and I do a lot of multitasking. I also do a lot of video encoding and DVD authoring.

I want to get 2 IDE 80GB ATA HDD running at 7200 RPM

My question:

Should I get a hard disk with 8MB cache (ATA100) or a hard disk with 2MB cache (ATA133)?

Regards,

J.F.D.
Freelance I.T. Consultant

 

[braddds]

This link may help answer your question(s).

http://www.madshrimps.be/?action=getarticle&articID=69

Cheers

 

[cdogg]

braddds link is helpful to see the difference between 2MB and 8MB cache drives, but it seems you are also trying to compare ATA/100 to ATA/133.

The short answer is to go with the 8MB cache drives. Cache is more important than the IDE interface once you're at 100MB/s. All IDE drives rarely even get close to the 100MB/s barrier that ATA/100 is restricted to. When in a standard configuration, most will average a transfer rate somewhere between 30-45MB/s.

RAID arrays transfer rates are higher, of course, but rarely exceed 70MB/s. The extra headroom that ATA/133 provides is not needed, but can make a slight difference in a RAID array. However, the 8MB cache is more important (by the way, there are ATA/133 8MB cache IDE drives).


~cdogg
[tab]"The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources"
[tab][tab]- A. Einstein

 

[FaiTHLeSS]

Why not just get to 2HD with ATA133 + 8mb cache + 7200rpm?

 

[EvelKnievel]

I've seen test where 2mb cache outproformed the 8, but nobody wants to hear about that.
One of the tests was between a Maxtor 2mb and a WD 8mb, not a maxtor vs. maxtor.

Frome what I've seen, I agree with cdogg, "All IDE drives rarely even get close to the 100MB/s."

Just realized this is not an answer to YOUR QUESTION. I just wanted to add something.

 

[cdogg]

FaiTHLeSS,
Yes, I did mention that there were ATA/133 drives with 8MB cache. Also, it's all about the comparison that SpookyVBA is trying to make - they might have found 2 particular drives at comparable prices.

But yes, the easy answer is to go all out and get an ATA/133 or Serial ATA drive with 8MB cache. The point, however, was that ATA/133 or higher interfaces won't necessarily make that much difference. It's all about the cache...


EvelKnievel,
Interesting about a 2MB cache drive outperforming an 8MB cache drive...do you have a link to such a review? I'd be curious to see what benchmark. HDTach is the most widely accepted benchmark for overall performance.


~cdogg
[tab]"The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources"
[tab][tab]- A. Einstein