Esata?

[WiseCrack]

Thanks for the link.

Only problem I see is that the cache size of that drive is smaller 16mb vs 32mb of the drive from Take2.

Will this make a diference in the transfer rate?

 

[Bona Botse]

Thanks for the link.

Only problem I see is that the cache size of that drive is smaller 16mb vs 32mb of the drive from Take2.

Will this make a diference in the transfer rate?

well according to this and some other sites [do a quick google search], it won't make much difference.

EDIT: also depends on what you'll be doing with the drive, it seems

Having some cache in a drive is somewhat important to overall performance; the drive will use it to buffer recent requests and to "pre-fetch" data likely to be requested by the system in the future. If this data in the cache is in fact needed, it will be transferred to the system at the drive's external transfer rate--much faster than would be possible if there were no cache. However, the number of requests that fit into this category is relatively small. Increasing the size of the cache even by a substantial percentage doesn't change this very much, because no matter how large the cache, it will always be a very small percentage of the total capacity of the drive. Caches today, despite significant increases in size, are still far less than 0.1% of the size of the disk drives they serve.

As memory prices have fallen into the "dirt cheap" range, drive manufacturers have realized that they can increase the size of their buffers at very little cost. Certainly nothing is lost in doing this; extra cache won't hurt performance; but neither does it greatly improve it. As a result, if interface transfer rate is the "reigning champion" of overrated performance specifications, then cache size is probably the "prime contender". Some people seem to think a 2 MiB buffer makes a drive four times as fast as one with a 512 kiB buffer! In fact, you'd be hard pressed to find even a 4% difference between them in most cases, all else being equal. Not surprisingly, both external transfer rate and cache size are overrated for the same reason: they apply to only a small percentage of transfers.

 

[WiseCrack]

Ah thanks for the information will save me some ZA rants.

I will use the drive to copy allot of pron so the faster the better )

 

[Bona Botse]

Ah thanks for the information will save me some ZA rants.

I will use the drive to copy allot of pron so the faster the better )

lol, also had to buy an external to put all of my, errr, stuff, on
i got the usb only version of the one i showed u above [only realised later that i had esata ] and it takes about 1 minute to copy 1.4GB to it, so not so shabby