Caviar Green as Primary Drive

Namak

Namak

Namak

Associate
Joined
15 Aug 2009
Posts
302
I have seen lots of spec check requests with the Caviar Green as the Primary Drive.

I have generally suggested alternatives as my feelings is that it is designed as a storage drive or for an eco computer. As the HDD is the main bottleneck my feelings is for a couple of £ more it is worth going for a Black.

What do you - the experts in the HDD forum think?
 
If your just after a standard hard drive then i would go for either a Seagate 7200.12 or a Samsung F1. The 7200.12's were close to a raptor in a lot of tests due to the way the platers are read and the data density, Samsungs use 3 platers in the 1TB drives where as the seagates new 7200.12's squeeze 500GB on a plater so only have 2 platers hence why they are faster than most drives and have a better substain increased read speeds.

The WD black has 3 platters by the way :)

HTH
 
Comparing the 7200.12s to Raptors is fairly pointless as they are best suited for different things. Sure, sequential reads/writes probably win out on the 7200.12s because of increased platter density, but the 7200.12 access times (which is what makes all the difference for an OS drive) are blown out of the water by the Raptors due to the faster spin speed.
To quote the article you referenced to,
In fact the only test in which the Seagate lost out to the Samsung 1TB was when copying 0.99GB of small MP3 files in our FC-Test MP3 file pattern benchmark, when it was a full two seconds, or over twenty five percent slower. While this might seem a little strange, especially considering the fact that this deficit was reversed in the large file ISO file pattern benchmark, it’s likely down to Seagate simply choosing to optimise the drive’s firmware for copying large rather than small files.
Click to expand...
and
While the Seagate 7200.12 1TB drive is certainly no slouch [random access times] it's disappointingly slower than the previous generation of Seagate drives
Click to expand...

Guess what things are important for OS drives to be fast, and which things the 7200.12 sucks at, relatively speaking?
 
That's interesting because i bought a 500GB for my mum's PC about 6 weeks ago based on the platter size but without doing the proper research. Since then I have heard some pretty negative things but i was a bit reassured by the fact that Overclockers seem to be using them quite heavily in their pre-built systems.

Don't think that my Mum will be affected too much either way for her general usage but haven;t been comfortable recommending them with some of the post on here I have read about them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom