6Gb/s 5900rpm VS 3Gb/s 7200 ??

[Rafkoo]

Simple question : what is quicker 3gb/s 7200rpm or 6gb/s 5900rpm HDD?

I appreciate that they may be quicker at doing certain things... question is which is quicker at what?

Cheers all!
Raf

 

[cmndr_andi]

3Gbps 7200rpm is quicker in pretty much every metric.

AFAIK no standard 7200rpm (or 5900rpm) mechanical hard disks get anywhere near saturating the bandwidth available by the slower 3Gbps SATA connection - so a 5900rpm on a 6Gbps just isn't required.

 

[RJC]

Considering mechanical hard drives can't saturate 3gb/s let alone 6gb/s I would lean towards the 7200rpm as the extra spin speed should help in seeking ect.

 

[Rafkoo]

Wow - really??!?!

So what is the point of 6Gb/s SATA? Only useful for SSD??

So if I'm building a system with Z68 board, but no SSDs, there's no need to spend the extra on 6Gb/s HDDs ? I'd be better off with a 10000rpm drive at 3Gb/s maybe?

 

[Rafkoo]

And why do they produce 6Gb/s mechanical drives if the bandwidth is never saturated??

 

[cmndr_andi]

Wow - really??!?!

So what is the point of 6Gb/s SATA? Only useful for SSD??

Yup - pretty much. Only SSDs make use of the extra bandwidth.

So if I'm building a system with Z68 board, but no SSDs, there's no need to spend the extra on 6Gb/s HDDs ? I'd be better off with a 10000rpm drive at 3Gb/s maybe?

Aye, I wouldn't spend any extra money to specifically get a 6Gbps mechanical drive. That said, some 7200rpm mechanical drives are good value, perform well and happen to come with a 6Gbps interface, don't discount going for one of these drives - just keep in mind that the 6Gbps interface isn't of any benefit.

As for 10000rpm drives - tbh I wouldn't go down this road. They haven't come down in price nearly as far as 7200rpm drives and they tend to be a bit loud. Instead, if you want a primary HDD that is more responsive than a 7200rpm drive then I would suggest going for a cheap SSD like this (install the OS and key apps on the SSD and games/videos etc. on a secondary mechanical storage drive).

And why do they produce 6Gb/s mechanical drives if the bandwidth is never saturated??

It's good for marketing. Similar to how edge-lit LED TVs/monitors have dynamic contrast ratios of 100000:1+, technically it can be achieved but in practice it is of no use.

 

[Rroff]

And why do they produce 6Gb/s mechanical drives if the bandwidth is never saturated??

Marketing, 6gb/s sounds better than 3gb/s even if in reality it makes little odds.

 

[Rafkoo]

Thanks everyone - that has been super helpful and rather an eye-opener....

 

[bledd]

Newer drives are just faster..

See here, my 640GB WD Blue drive (7200rpm)

Samsung F4 2tb (5400rpm)

Both were just data drives and not the main OS drive

 

[Sin_Chase]

Newer drives are just faster..

Samsung F4 2tb (5400rpm)

Both were just data drives and not the main OS drive

Nothing to do with newness I imagine. The platter density of a 2TB drive is huge compared to a 64GB so the rotational speed makes little to no odds in such a comparison.

 

[cmndr_andi]

Nothing to do with newness I imagine. The platter density of a 2TB drive is huge compared to a 64GB so the rotational speed makes little to no odds in such a comparison.

+1 The WD caviar blue 640GB uses two 320GB platters if I remember rightly, but the samsung F4 uses three 667GB ones. So for sequential reads the F4 will destroy the WB blue. However, if you look at the two drives in terms of access times and random read/write speeds then the caviar will beat the F4, even though it is a much older drive - hence it makes for a better primary hard disk (and the F4 is great for a storage drive).

 

[Yellowbeard]

One simple thing to keep in mind here is that the newer SATA3/6Gb controllers are the new standard. New drives will be made with the new controllers.