Samsung 400GB SATA Vs Seagate 400gb SATA

[topgazza]

Comparing the two drives, both with 16mb cache there seems little difference other than a 3 year warranty Vs a 5 year warranty. Appreciate there will be many preferences here, most good, some bad but with the same stated performance specs the Samsungs seem to rate as quieter and cooler. Though the biggest difference seems to be the £23 price difference.

I'm guessing similar reliability in drives these days so logic seems to say "Samsung". Fair assessment?

 

[topgazza]

Oh, right...because of that perpendicular file access thingy. Seek and access times look the same on the specs but I guess in the real world this will make a diff. I agree budget against benefit is always something to look at and whilst I don't need bleeding edge speed on my HD its always a nice thing to have if the price diff is not to big and if I'd actually notice the difference....

My main use is Internet, games from time to time, WP and DVD burning so its not a huge workload in terms of HD and I do have a dual core AMD and 1gb of dual channel RAM that caters for that sort of thing.

Thanks for responding

 

[topgazza]

Ouch Spb !

Good point

2 x Seagate 320Gb 16mb cache @ £74 each

Or

2 x 300GB Samsung 8mb cache drives @ £68 each?

I must confess I like quiet but only £6 for another 8mb cache and a touch more GB...mmmm

Why can't this be simple.......?