2mb vs 8mb+ HDD cache for HTPC

[Sniper82]

I have a 40gb 7200rpm I'd like to drop in my fresh built HTPC its 7200rpm but only 2mb cache. I am only wanting to use this as a OS HD and putting media on a bigger HDD with 16mb cache.

Is there a difference in 2mb cache and 8+ if its just the OS?

 

[Binky]

Is that 40gb a typo? Maybe 400gb? I don't think the 2mb vs 8mb cache will not really be an issue, but that's a very small drive (40gb) which means it's very old (and slow). HTPC's are generally less sensitive to HD speed than a desktop, but that is a really old drive.

One of the HTPC sites I browse occasionallly did a test of an SSD vs a standard hard drive. Their conclusion was that an SSD is wasted in an HTPC as the boot drive due to the relatively low read/writes. Most of the action is sustained and sequential reads and writes on the data/media drive(s).

 

[Sniper82]

naw no typo lol . Was just gonna use it for the OS. What would you recommend for a OS drive thats not to big?

 

[Soundmanred]

I would not worry about cache size in that application (or most applications to be honest)

 

[pukemon]

To the OP, relative to other drives made whenever yours was manufacturered, the drive's cache probably won't make that much of a difference. Why not just use the single big drive you already have? It'll use less overall power at least.

 

[mmntech]

I think cache size only really makes a difference if you're constantly accessing vary large files, such as gaming.

 

[jtvang125]

Rotational speeds and platter size will have a bigger effect on performance than cache size. If all that's going to be on it will be OS and standard programs you should be fine. If you're going to be installing games, recording to the drive or stream you should get a larger drive with a bigger cache size.

 

[sswingle]

I forget if it was Anand or Tom's that did an extensive test on hard drives with varying cache sizes and found that performance differences are negligible.