> From: Adam Levin [mailto:[email protected]] > > While this is the first time I've ever heard that 7.2k benchmark the same as > 15k, I do know that 10k 2.5" benchmark nearly identically to 15k 3.5", mostly > because of the smaller diameter reducing the rotational latency.
I think you meant smaller diameter reducing head seek time, not rotational latency. (Rotational latency would depend on rpm's and not diameter, while the head seek would be dependent on diameter, and not rpm's.) While I recognize the intuitiveness of smaller diameter --> less distance to travel, seems to be common sense that the average head seek time should be smaller, but I have not observed that to be the case when looking at seek times of various sized disks (2.5" vs 3.5"). I *suspect* that the head seek time is not so much limited by the distance it needs to travel, as it is, microdetecting position, vibration/oscillation stabilization, and locking onto a track. But I'm only making this guess, based on my perception that the average seek times of 2.5" vs 3.5" disks are approximately the same. _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
