7k100 vs 5k160 dilemma

[w0qj]

The time is coming when (if you're rich), use a 100% NAND memory hard drive, which has no spinning platters!

Much less power consumption, much more durable, no disk head crashes, etc. Just more expensive, but this will continue to drop...


Imagine your notebook computer working on a constantly shaking bus with a NAND memory hard drive--your data files won't get corrupted during saving! (i've seen this before).

Current maximum capacity is 64 GB just released, with 128 GB scheduled for next year, which should be big enough for most users (if you've got money to burn)...

But it sure would be nice to be able to work on my computer files while in a train, bus, etc...

www.tgdaily.com/content/view/31367/135/

[teetee]

The interface speed(ATA-7 or ATA-6) is never an issue to me. The only I/O bottleneck on hard drive I have encountered is due the mechanical limits(hdparm test). In other words, the faster the disk rotates, the faster real-life data transfer/seeking is.

I will choose 7k100.

[unrortit]

100gb its lots of space,let alone 160
personally i prefer to destroke hdds
via fat32partitions for best performance +nfts for storage.+ dammerrr vista
that being said the7.2k40 enterpise hitachi
attains geniune 7-8ms seek times on the ol thinkpad
i run most agressive settings ,max power,max cp,max everything
on 108mps wifi no power savings whatsoever
and its idle +hdd running uses 12.8 watts. on a 650 machine
the 850 a tad more but not by much(with only the screen brightness on not so bright setting.
if i drop the cpu speed to 500(1.3v)drop the pci bus speeds,reset the idle parameters,wifi etc all to economy it should go down
even more.the drive runs heaps cooler than a two year old 4200 rpm travelstar and a more recent 5.4k samsung
its quieter too.
from my observations im convinced ultimately
you go for either speed at a cost of storage
or go for storage at a cost of speed
with nowadays technology the future,i would run either any day
and hurl the 4.2k to obliviation.