SATA 7200RPM 3.0GB/s vs 10000RPM 1.5GB/s

[mstshtml]

Which drive would have faster load times and be most reliable a SATA 7200RPM 3.0GB/s or a 10,000RPM 1.5GB/s?
Thanks

 

[AMDSCOrPiO]

10k rpm

 

[Orayn]

Neither one can use up all that bandwidth. Go with the 10,000 RPM.

 

[drake]

I went 10k RAID 0 on my current build.

 

[Nitestick]

overall the Raptor would be faster but the 7200RPM drive would be more reliable just because they have a lower failure rate. it depends on your uses for the drive as to what i would reccomend

 

[efd753]

overall the Raptor would be faster but the 7200RPM drive would be more reliable just because they have a lower failure rate. it depends on your uses for the drive as to what i would reccomend

dont they use raptors on servers? maybe im mistaken. why would they use a HD that have a higher failure rate then one that cost less?


and the 10k would be faster. HD a limited by thier mechanical parts the faster they go the faster they operate. SATA can go to 100000 Gbps and the 10k would still beat it.

 

[Vybuni]

Some servers might use 10k raptors, some use 15k SCSI drives, some use regular old7200 ATA/SATA drives.

 

[cedjunior]

Get one of those new "perpendicular recording" drives. Seagate has a 320GB model for $95 on newegg. I've seen a few benchmarks and when compared to a 10k drive they perform almost as well.