Caviar 16mb vs Deskstar 8mb

[MoRT489]

Hi all

Bit unsure as to which will be faster for gaming/load times. The Deskstar has quicker seek times but less cache... Deskstar is 160GB per platter dont know what the caviar is?

Western Digital Caviar RE 160GB 1600YS SATA-II 16MB Cache
Hitachi Deskstar 7K160 NCQ 160GB SATA-II 8MB Cache

Also if i go for a larger HDD instead, would it be worth getting the Deskstar 320GB 16mb cache over the 250GB 8mb cache version?
or Western Digital Caviar SE16 250GB 2500KS SATA-II 16MB Cache

Thanks in advance!

 

[C64]

I've just gone from western digital ide ata 100 drives to the new aaks sata 2
and i havent really noticed a huge difference in day to day usuage "yet" bit disappointing tbh.
Go for the 320 gb western didgital aaks drive it is the fastest single sata 2 drive around i think.Ram has more to do with load times than hdd in my opinion.Went from 1 gig to 2 gig recently and it has halved load times.
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HD-130-WD&groupid=701&catid=14&subcat=768

 

[rpstewart]

That particular WD drive isn't single platter, you need to look at the 160Gb AAJS for a single platter.

There's not that much difference between 8Mb & 16Mb cache drives, the extra cache doesn't provide anything like the same improvement as going from 2Mb to 8Mb.

I think (and I'm not 100% on this) that the linked Hitachis are slightly quicker than the WD.

EDIT: Hadn't spotted that the 320Gb AAKS drives had finally turned up, they are faster than the Hitachis.