• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Faster HD = faster defragging?

I don't know the specs of those drives....if the drives are the same size, then a faster drive should defrag faster....but a 15K RPM SCSI drive will still take longer to defrag than a 5400RPM drive 1/10 the size. Obviously.
 
well the 800jb is 80GB.. 7200rpm ATA 100.. and the Quantum is 20GB.. 7200rpm and ATA 66. I don't know.. the Quantum has always seemed slower I think
 
Not necessarily. Faster access time almost always equals faster defrag, higher STR does not, because disk defragging involves constant random reading and writing. Since IDE access times have gotten slower over the past 3 years defrag times should be pretty similar with the rest of the drive improvements overcoming the slower access. Watching a Cheetah defrag and then an IDE drive defrag will leave no doubt in anyone's mind which drive is better at handling random reads and writes that servers have to deal with. Also, the larger capacity of today's drives will significantly increase the total time to defrag a drive even if the drive is faster.

Edit: If the Quantum is any fireball than the AS line then it has a pretty decent access time advantage over the WD and may very well handle heavy fragmentation better than the JB.
 
Well, its probably somewhat faster a drive, but considering the new one is 4x the size, while it will probably defrag faster per MB, its gonna take longer cuz it has to do 4x the work. Ya get me? Seek time is key for this sort of application, moreso than transfer speed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top