Winterlight,
I do not know much about SATA yet, but from the figures you give (yes, I do
know what they mean), I'd say that your new choice is ~150Gbits/sec faster
moving data at its' rated speed. This is based on the Data Xfr Rate-Buffer
to host.
All the rest of the specs are really internal device numbers; and most of
them, while a bit faster, look nominal to me.
Overall, it does appear to be a faster drive; plus it is some 230GB bigger
also.
But, then the question would be, Does your m/b's SATA ports/controller do
3.0Gbit/sec? If not, it looks like this drive may be only just a bit
quicker; but still bigger.
Best,
Duncan
At 13:04 11/27/2008 -0800, you wrote:
Here are the specs for my old SATA 1 RAPTOR = 74GB
Data Transfer Rate (maximum)
- Buffer to Host 1.5 Gb/s max2
Average Read Seek 4.5 ms (average)
Track-to-track Seek3 0.6 ms (average)
Full Stroke Seek3 10.2 ms (average)
Average Latency 2.99 ms (nominal)
Rotational Speed 10,000 RPM
Buffer 8 MB
And here are the specs for the new 300GB Raptor I am thinking about
getting to install OS and programs on.
- Buffer to Host 3.0 Gb/s max2
Average Read Seek 4.2 ms (average)
Track-to-track Seek3 0.7 ms (average)
Full Stroke Seek3 8.5 ms (average)
Average Latency 5.5 ms (nominal)
Rotational Speed 10,000 RPM
Buffer 16 MB
OK the new one is faster, but a lot faster? the latency number shows a big
improvement but the others maybe 10 or 15 percent improvement. I wonder if
it is worth spending 200 bucks to upgrade. Or am I not getting something?
