Question on 8MB Cache Drives

[Muck]

I'm putting together a business machine (which will run Autocad 2004). So I'm looking for a quick drive. While I've heard a lots of great things from people about these drives, I've yet to use one myself. For those of you who have, are you seeing that much of a difference from the 2MB drives?? Also, I've yet to see the ATA133 advantage over 100. Have things changed recently?? Any input is appreciated.

BTW - I'm eyeing the $90, 80 gig/8.9 ms Western Dig (along with that 3-yr warranty).

 

[snidy1]

I noticed a differance when I went to 8 MB cache.

 

[Confused]

Originally posted by: snidy1
I noticed a differance when I went to 8 MB cache.

And I noticed an even bigger difference when i went to a RAID 0 with 2 of them!


Confused

 

[DaveSimmons]

Search keyword "2MB" should find several of the earlier "2MB-vs-8MB" threads.

One considerations: WD 8MB drives have a 3-year warranty but run a bit hotter and louder than other brands.

 

[DWW]

Do even the OEM western digital 8meg drives have 3 year warranties???

 

[WyteWatt]

Originally posted by: Confused

Originally posted by: snidy1
I noticed a differance when I went to 8 MB cache.

And I noticed an even bigger difference when i went to a RAID 0 with 2 of them!


Confused

Isn't running two IDE HDs in Raid 0 a little risky? Espically if you don't backup.

 

[Muck]

Originally posted by: DWW
Do even the OEM western digital 8meg drives have 3 year warranties???

Yes, but only the 8 meggers.

 

[thatsright]

Speaking of RAID:

I just bought one New WD Caviar 120GB HD w/ 8MB cache for my new ABIT IC7 MB. I am just planning on running WinXP Pro in non-RAID mode, but could anyone give me an Idea of what performance % increase I would see if I bought the same exact WD HD and put em in Raid 0?

Thanks a lot

 

[amdskip]

Originally posted by: imtim83

Originally posted by: Confused

Originally posted by: snidy1
I noticed a differance when I went to 8 MB cache.

And I noticed an even bigger difference when i went to a RAID 0 with 2 of them!
Confused

Isn't running two IDE HDs in Raid 0 a little risky? Espically if you don't backup.

Of course it is but you don't have to use raid for storage. I use a single 8mb cache Maxtor 120gb hard drive and I am considering another for raid but I'll always have another hard drive or two for data storage.

 

[zephyrprime]

Well, in test the difference is about 20% which makes 8mb cost effective. Does autocad use the HD a lot? You might want to consider SCSI if it does.

 

[amdskip]

Originally posted by: zephyrprime
Well, in test the difference is about 20% which makes 8mb cost effective. Does autocad use the HD a lot? You might want to consider SCSI if it does.

Not really other than opening and saving files. You use ram the most.

 

[DT4K]

I got a WD 800JB with the 8MB cache and I've been very pleased with it.
I upgraded from an old 5400rpm drive though, so can't comment on the 2MB vs 8MB difference.
But I'm almost always one of the first couple of players to get in the game in Battlefield 1942 when a new round starts with a new map. So I don't know about autocad, but it loads BF maps really fast, which is cool because I can grab a plane or helicopter before the other players have even spawned.

 

[mechBgon]

I noticed an enormous difference when I went from a 2MB-cache drive to an 8MB-cache drive. Doesn't hurt that the 8MB-cache driver runs 15000rpm and has an Ultra160 SCSI interface and sub-4ms seeks either Sorry, ol' Barracuda ATA IV, you're going in the computer named "Trash"

If you don't need staggering amounts of capacity, do consider a nice Cheetah 15k.3. It's built and warranted for 5 years of non-stop abuse in a server, it generates no more heat than a typical IDE drive, and idles quietly. The 5-year warranty offsets the initial cost to some extent if you really don't have a need for high capacity. Just a thought.