hard drives?

[Williama1018]

I have a 40gig WD hard drive and a 160gig WD hard drive, both r 7200 rpm hard drives. My goal is to have the 40 gig for my windows drive and the 160 for everything else. My question is, the 160 has an 8mb cache and the 40 only has a 2mb cache, does it really make a difference? should i have the 160 as my main with multiple partitions? Need input guys.

Thanks,

Will

 

[parsley007]

i would put the 160 as my main drive and partition it like you said, i think you would notice the cache difference. btw, the drop me a line in your sig has http:// in it

 

[Williama1018]

thanks for your opinion and for pointing out that my "email me" link was messed up. Are you basing this on fact or just personal opinion? When I had the 160 as my main drive with partitions of C-30gig and D-130gig, I lost about 20 gigs of storage. Was I doing something wrong with windows that would not recognize all of the space? Should I format only the first 30 gigs for windows and format the rest after installing Windows SP1 so that it will support the larger drive format? I greatly appreciate anyones help with this. I'm also looking for some 3200 memory and have some "stuff" to trade for this if anyone has some, drop me a line at my email and i'll get back ASAP.

Thanks much to one and all,
Will

 

[EeyoreX]

A 160GB hard drive will be recognized as about 149GB. Link-O-Matic. For the most part, in real world terms, the cache won't make that big a difference. It will matter in synthetic benchmarks. My file servers OS is installed on a drive with a 2MB cache, and it's plenty fast enough for me. And on top of that its a 5400 rpm drive. Copying files is not that big a difference IMO.

\Dan

 

[Williama1018]