Quick Storage Hdd decision

[Zeronova]

hey guys im looking into getting a new Hdd for my system. I current run a SSD for my OS drive and just looking to replace my really old back-up/storage drive. Im looking to put all my music on it and probably a couple games that I play(SWTOR and GW2 in the future). Im down to 2 choices and was wondering if anyone has had any good or bad decisions with these 2 Hdd's and which I should get based on everyones opinion. The 2 drives are Western Digital Caviar Blue WD10EALX or Seagate Barracuda ST1000DM003. Both are the same price and are both 1tb 7200rpm drives the only difference the seagate has a 64mb cache and the WD has a 32mb cache. thanks for any advice.

 

[po1nted]

Seagate Barracuda ST1000DM003

 

[alvine]

go for bigger cache

 

[geofelt]

32mb vs. 64 mb is mostly marketing. The cache size will make negligible difference in performance.

I have always had no problem with WD, but I think Samsung has become a very good player.

If it helps, here is a report on component return rates from nov 2011. Read the whole article to understand where the statistics came from.
http://www.behardware.com/articles/843-6/components-returns-rates-5.html

 

[Zeronova]

Is there a performce difference between sata 3.0gb/s and sata 6.0gb/s?

 

[geofelt]

Is there a performce difference between sata 3.0gb/s and sata 6.0gb/s?

On SSD's, yes. On Hard drives, no.
The transfer rate refers to the cache buffer to sata transfer rate.
But Hard drives do not store much in the buffer, and the platter to buffer transfer rate is many times slower.

 

[Zeronova]

K thanks for all help guys...the advice has been very helpful