[whoopass]

Hi, I want to buy a new hard drive for an old (2004) computer, which I plan to move to a new (2009) custom build this summer. I've looked over the options and I'm not sure what to get, so I'd appreciate a little help.

Listed at the bottom of the post are the drives I'm considering. My preferred price range is $100, plus or minus $70 or so, unless it's really worth it. I just want something large, fast, and reliable, that won't corrupt anything or die on me.

I have a few basic questions:

1. Is Western Digital still the hotspot here? I know a lot of people swear by Seagate. All the drives listed below are WD.

2. Would my old single-core 2004 computer, currently connected to a WD80 0JD-60LSA0 (WD Caviar SE) with a SATA host controller, be able to support one of these hard drives until I build the new computer? Are there overheating dangers? Large power supply needs? This old PC just has basic ventilation (rather dusty) and an old 350W power supply.

3. How much of a difference do the main specs make? How much "better" is a 32MB than a 16MB cache, like the ones listed below? How different is the 7200 RPM of a WDC Black (my current favorite) from a VelociRaptor's 10,000 RPM?

4. How much does a larger hard drive size (the WDC Black and Green come in otherwise identical sizes) influence other factors like speed, seek times, etc? Is it worth it?

5. RAID has always confused the heck out of me, even after reading several guides. I only plan to buy a single hard drive. Is this a bad plan? If I did go with RAID, does it matter whether the two drives are of the same model, or even manufacturer?

And a few comparisons:

6. The front runners, listed below: Size aside, how do they compare? Does RAID factor into the decision?

7. WDC Black vs. VelociRaptor: How do the two drives stack up given that the Black has a cache of 32MB but the Velociraptor has only 16MB?

8. WDC Black vs. WD20EADS (?). How about these? Despite the huge price difference, as far as I can tell they have similar stats except Newegg doesn't state the WD20EADS's speed.

Thanks for any advice. Hopefully it'll help other people who are as confused as I am too. And sorry for the novel-length post.


A list of the drives mentioned:

Front runners:

Black WD1001FALS 1TB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s
Green WD10EADS 1TB 32MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s
GP WD10000LSRTL 1TB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s
RE3 WD1002FBYS 1TB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s

Comparison drives I probably won't get:

WD20EADS 2TB 32MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s
VelociRaptor WD3000HLFS 300GB 10000 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s
VelociRaptor WD1500HLFS 150GB 10000 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s
Raptor WD740ADFD 74GB 10000 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 1.5Gb/s

Alternative sizes for front runners:

Green WD15EADS 1.5TB 32MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s
Black WD7501AALS 750GB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s
Black WD6401AALS 640GB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s
Black WD5001AALS 500GB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s

Lower-spectrum alternatives, only mentioned for comparison purposes:

Green WD6400AACS 640GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s
Blue WD4000AAKS 400GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s
RE3 WD5002ABYS-01B1B0 500GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s
RE3 WD3202ABYS 320GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s
SE16 WD6400AAKS 640GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s
SE16 WD5000AAKS 500GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s
SE16 WD5000KSRTL 500GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s
SE16 WD3200AAKS 320GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s

[Carbon]

1. A lot of people have really mixed opinions except for WD, which most seem to like. I like them too, and it helps that they have the fastest 7200s on the market.
2. Definitely, it shouldn't draw any more.
3. The cache doesn't make a difference. Even the RPMs don't make a substantial difference. What you want to look for is larger capacity platters - for example, a HDD with two 320GB platters like the WD 640GB is going to seriously outperform one with 4x 250GB platters like the WD 1TB. This is because if more data is on one platter, it's quicker to access, both randomly and sequentially (and since if you do a defrag it's going to be sequential, you don't want a file having pieces all over separate platters, which doesn't do wonders for access time). Skip the Velociraptors, grab a WD 640GB, and if you really want a lot of speed short-stroke it so that you have a small partition on the outside of the platter that is faster than the rest.
4. Larger hard drives usually have more small platters, although I think the new 1TB WDs use 2x 500GB platters rather than 4x 250GB. Speed-wise, you want to look at 320GB and 640GB, as WD's biggest platter size that I know exists is 320GB. The 1TB WDs are actually pretty fast, just not as fast as the 640GBs.
5. RAID is useless for you as a home user.

In essence, narrow yourself down to the WD6401AALS or the WD1001FALS, depending on if you value a little speed or a little capacity. If it is a storage drive, a 5200RPM drive like the WD 640GB Green AACS will do fine, but generally speaking since they're the same price the regular 7200RPM drive is better.

You can find most of the answers here too in the Hard Drive section.