 |
 |
What are faster, 160GB or 250GB drives in G5s?
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Status:
Offline
|
|
Looking at CTOing a G5 DP for the Radeon 9800, so may as well do the HD upgrade also, but I will add a duplicate drive also to do a RAID. Dont NEED 500GB, 360 would do, but just wondering if anyone is aware of which is the best setup in terms of speed.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Aug 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
So far, evidence is that the 160MB drive is 4-6 weeks faster than the 250MB. 
KeS
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
I was looking for a solution for a fast drive setup with my g5 too. I ended up getting a 10k SATA 36gb drive to boot off and the 250 for storage. Then i realized how much of a hassle it would be to move my users folder off the boot drive to this bigger one.
I just requested an RMA for the tiny 10k drive and am looking into a raid 0 with yet another 250gb SATA. I don't need 500gb either. Will a raid 0 work with a drive that dosen't match? like a 160 SATA drive? I don't know what to do. I really don't know what kind of performance upgrade to expect from either of these combos.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Piacenza (italy)
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: ~/
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by tyson.r:
I was looking for a solution for a fast drive setup with my g5 too. I ended up getting a 10k SATA 36gb drive to boot off and the 250 for storage. Then i realized how much of a hassle it would be to move my users folder off the boot drive to this bigger one.
I just requested an RMA for the tiny 10k drive and am looking into a raid 0 with yet another 250gb SATA. I don't need 500gb either. Will a raid 0 work with a drive that dosen't match? like a 160 SATA drive? I don't know what to do. I really don't know what kind of performance upgrade to expect from either of these combos.
If you mate a 250GB drive and a 160GB in a RAID 0, you will end up with only 2x160GB. The remaining space on the 250GB unit will be wasted.
Ideally, all drives in a RAID will be the same size (so no space is wasted) and will be of the same make/model so drives access times are as similar as possible.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
A quick look on Google reveals no 15k SATA drives, dunno why - the 15k rpm drives are all fitted with SCSI 320 Mbps interfaces (that's Ultra-Wide SuperMagoo).
Raw speed-hungry, you can stripe a pair of Western Digital Raptor drives. These are SATA hard drives spinning at 10000 rpm.
|
|
Actual conversation between UCLA and Stanford during a login on early Internet - U: I'm going to type an L! Did you get an L? S: I got one-one-four. L! U:Did you get the O? S: One-one-seven. U: <types G> S: The computer just crashed.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Home
Status:
Offline
|
|
One of the lessons I learned was that you should NEVER boot off of an array. They are the least stable method and should be used for storage.
That is why I am befuddled with the 2 drive limitation of the G5. I am going to try and mod my machine to get a thrid drive in there somehow when I get it.....if i can!
|
|
933 Quicksilver SUPERMACHINE!
iMac DV SE 500
Vic 20
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by cdhostage:
A quick look on Google reveals no 15k SATA drives, dunno why - the 15k rpm drives are all fitted with SCSI 320 Mbps interfaces (that's Ultra-Wide SuperMagoo).
Ahem, get it right. That's 320 MBps (MegaBYTES), not Mbps. Dual channel Ultra320 can pull 640MB/sec.
SATA can only do 150MB/sec, and that's only in short bursts.
|
|
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Status:
Offline
|
|
Thanks to all who have replied, and the input has certainly given me food for thought, such as the 10k for a boot drive. Still would like to know which is the fastest out of the 2 drives Apple provide on their options so atleast my second drive is as fast as possible.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Status:
Offline
|
|
Anyone aware of any more tests or reviews now that more units are starting to come through?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Utah
Status:
Offline
|
|
So far, evidence is that the 160MB drive is 4-6 weeks faster than the 250MB.
Funny.
I'm booting off an ATA/133 RAID, two striped 120GB WD Special edition drives. Have been for over a year. Thing runs fine.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jul 2002
Status:
Offline
|
|
Hey guys, I just found out more stuff, I took my 250 hard drive out (what a pain!).
Its a DiamondMax Plus 9 (6Y250M0).
The 7Y250M0 which you can buy online is a MaXLine Plus II which is a better drive.
The DiamondMax Plus 9 is a "desktop" line and the MaXLine Plus II is "Near-line Applications"
so i guess apple got a new cheaper version
by the way, they both have fluid bearings unlike the western digital, only the segate model is true serial ATA with no bridge thingy like the western digital and maxtor, but there is no 250 Gb segate that I know of.
and by the way, this hard drive gets HOT, i don't remember my old maxors ever getting this hot.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top
