New 16mb cache seagate vs 8mb cache

[Enerjex]

Hi all, i've looked around for a review with benchmarks of two new 7200.10 seagate barracudas but have had no luck as they are quite new. I have 2x 7200.10 250gb sataII 8mb cache drives (i asked for 16mb cache they told me they were but I had already writen on them when I discovered they weren't, stupid &%$%!). I need to know whether the 7200.10 seagate 250gb 16mb cache drives are actually any faster than the 8mb ones. On paper they're better I know, but if anyone could steer me to a review comparing the two models directly in a benchmark that would be great. The models in question are the ST3250620AS (16mb cache), and the ST3250820AS (8mb cache). Thanks all

[imported_Kohler]

Re: New 16mb cache seagate vs 8mb cache

The only thing I could think of is the HD's internal transfer rates might be slightly faster. Other than that its the industry trying to make you believe that you need 16 over 8. Kinda like everything else! I think it is probably worth it--I certainly noticed the diff when I bumped up to 8MB from 2MB--if you are transfering large files it would have to help.

[hemimotorz]

Re: New 16mb cache seagate vs 8mb cache

I never really unstood why they haven't just put a gig on hard drives. The biggist bootle kneck with PC's today is hard drive's. Hense you need 2 gigs to run BF2 since 1.2 crappy optizimation.

[)-SiN-( Max666]

Re: New 16mb cache seagate vs 8mb cache

I have an Maxtor 80gig 8mb cache sata 1 and a 200gig 16mb sata 1 . I did notice when i got the 200gig it was slightly faster installing windows . Allso it was abit faster with games but not a huge difference .