7200 RPM vs. 5400 RPM HDD

[wing7788]

Hi!

Is there a big difference between the two specs above in terms of performance?

Are 7200 RPM models reliable and can last long as the conventional 54oo RPM?

Any other issues posted will be appreciated.

[Toddly]

Wing I saw a nice performance increase when I bought my Maxtor 7200 drive about a year ago. This was all that I had changed at the time without reinstalling OS because all I did was copy over existing drive. No problems with it since that time so I also would say it is holding up as expected.

[araaraara]

There is a slight performance difference between 5400rpm and 7200rpm drives, mainly their access times max sustained transfer rates. Most 5400rpm drives have a 512kb cache buffer built-in, while most 7200rpm drives have a 2mb cache buffer built-in. You won't really notice a huge difference in speed unless you are doing something were the harddrive is working constantly and being pushed to the max like in benchmarking.

[CMonster]

<IMG SRC="http://www.dslextreme.com/users/cmonster3/nightnday.jpg" border=0>

I noticed a huge difference between the 5400rpm Maxtor I had been using and the 7200rpm Quantum and 7200rpm IBMs I now use.

[OuTpaTienT]

hmmm, so CMonster, am I to assume that you agree there is a slight performance benifit from a 7200rpm drive over a 5400rpm drive?

Guess I'm gonna have to dump these 5400's soon as I can afford to.

[NDC]

Yep! It is like comparing night and day when comparing 7,200rpm to 5,400rpm HDD's. You will especially notice big differences on applications that require heavy disk I/O...

You ought to see the difference between 10,000rpm and 7,200rpm! http://www.sysopt.com/forum/wink.gif

[Dputiger]

It's always going to depend on what you're doing.

For example:

Your LOAD times will be faster on software and the like. However, once inside the game (like Quake 3) you won't see much, if any, of a speed difference.

It all boils down to what you need.

[VERT]

yup I noticed a big difference between my old 6.4gb 5400rpm to my new 30gb 7200rpm

[wyvrn]

I recall reading an article where a few 5400 RPM drives had a higher transfer rate even though their spindle speed was slower. I don't remember the reason though.

[Warthog]

I agree with CMonster.

I noticed quite a difference when changing from 5400 to 7200rpm.

Warthog

[wing7788]

CMonster: Night/Day ?

Now I'm really confused... Here in Antarctica, there's really not much difference between night and day! During the month of June for example, we get no sun, even during the day! http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif


BTW people, I'm inviting everyone of you overclockers fanatics to come over here and do your stuff here. Because of the freeeeezing temperatures, you'll get the best cooling system and just might overclock your processors to as much as 100% ! http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

Brrrr...

[LadyTech]

Wing,
7200 vs. 5400 rpm, good question. There are a great no. of reviews out on this subject. In my humble opinion, it will depend on the brand that you buy. Some 5400 rpm drives actually do outperform some of the 7200. It's early and my brain can't come up with exact links for you quickly. My suggestion, read some of the many articles out there on this, as well as these fine people's posts.

[wyvrn]

Here is one (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1197&p=4) done in March 2000 at Anandtech. Seems to agree with the fact that 7200 RPM drives have better transfer rates than 5400, the rotational speed making a big difference. I have yet to find the article where a 5400 outperformed the 7200, so I probably just heard it somewhere, filed it, and my brain spat it out.

[wing7788]

Geeze wyvrn, can I pressure, instruct, order, command you to find that article which states that some 5400 RPM drives are faster than the 7200 RPM. Coz you know, I just bought one 7200 RPM drive and am afraid it might just be the one that does not perform to its standards...

Hmmm.... http://www.sysopt.com/forum/frown.gif

[wyvrn]

wing7788

NM I am in a bad mood this morning, let me get my coffe and try again.

Sorry about that.

[This message has been edited by wyvrn (edited 05-30-2001).]

[wing7788]

Ewww wyvrn, didnt mean to sound like that. Just treat the command, instruct and pressure in jest. Nothing serious... http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

[wyvrn]

Yeah I know man I am sorry. I totally misread it. Sorry about that it won't happen again (where is the embarrasment smiley?)

[LadyTech]

Geez you guys! http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

I'm running around today at work (without coffee). I'll see if I can dig up some reading for you in a bit. I feel now after peeking back and reading the lasts posts that I have to or no one will believe my words from here on out. Give me a bit...real, real busy at work...many people needing help this morning.
-Leslie

[wing7788]

Take your time LadyTech... Take your time...

http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif See how I carefully picked out the (kinder)words now, hehehe http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

[wyvrn]

I am looking for articles for you, and will let you know if I find any.

Don't take my angst as representative of Sysopt, most people here are genuinely nice http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

[LadyTech]

no offense taken, guys.
I cannot locate the review I read on the various manufactures hard drives, giving comparison across board on seek time, access time, etc. It might have been in PC World mag, becuase I can't find it on my usual links. Hummm...

[tvclyly]

I agree with most of you that the 7200rpm is faster than 5400rpm. However, I have to say that it is not a lot faster for the bucks. I have 15GB @ 7200, 20GB @ 5400, and 40GB @ 5400. It's faster when loading OS but after that, they are not much different. The 7200rpm claimed that the through put increases upto 25% (or 33% I forgot) over the 5400rpm. This means that if you copy 3GB of data from one drive to another, you will see 25%/33% faster. However, most games and applications are not that big so you will see only couple seconds diiferent are the most.

You will see big different if you have an old HD that is running at 5400rpm. I believe that old HDs (40MB - 8GB) are running DMA33. New HDs with 10GB @ 5400rpm or bigger will come with UDMA66/100. All 7200rpm comes with UDMa100. If you compare 6GB @ 5400rpm with 20GB @ 7200rpm, you will see big different because (1) the seek time is slower, (2) the through put is only 1/3 of the 7200rpm drive. This apply even when you openning small application or copy small amount of data.

If you want to compare, compare the drives that have the same size and manufacture but different rpm. The result is not big enough for you to pay extra on it. I also heard that 7200 creates more noise than the 5400rpm. My biggest comment is "If you use your home computer for about an hour a day, can you afford to spend an additional 10-15 seconds max". If your answer is NO, than you should go with the SCSI system with raid 3/5 implementation and 10,000rpm SCSI HDs.

Here is the price that I checked at Pricewatch (05-30-01):

WD 20GB @5400 UDMA66/100 = $69
WD 20GB @7200 UDMA100 = $82
WD 30GB @5400 UDMA66/100 = $82

I rather have the 30GB @ 5400 than 20GB @ 7200.

[This message has been edited by tvclyly (edited 05-30-2001).]

[This message has been edited by tvclyly (edited 05-30-2001).]

[This message has been edited by tvclyly (edited 05-30-2001).]

[Fingers]

Here's a head to head comparison between a 13GB 5,400rpm Quantum Fireball and a 13.6GB 7,200rpm Quantum Fireball.

ATA-66 vs ATA-33 / 5,400 vs 7,200 (http://www.hwupgrade.com/hd/ata66_vs_ata33/)

[Fingers]

OuT, I don't want to take this off-topic, but here's another one along the same line.

ATA/100 - Real Performance or Marketing Hype? (http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cfm?ArticleID=RWT011701000000)

&lt;EDIT&gt; I just re-read that article, and it gives some support for LadyTech's statements also. http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

[This message has been edited by Fingers (edited 05-30-2001).]

[prexaspes]

I'd bet you'd notice the difference betwixt the two when using a RAID 0 stripe...

4 x 5400
vs.
4 x 7200

eh?

[helldiverCDN]

For that, you can check here http://www.sysopt.com/forum/wink.gif :
http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cfm?ArticleID=RWT022201021241


Cheers,

hell out

[djallanj]

In the March 2001 issue of PC WORLD, they did an article on hard drives. They found that some of the 5400 drives outperformed some of the 7200 drives. It's worth a read. I'm about to purchase a new drive and I think I will go with the IBM 60gxp 60GB, a 7200 rpm drive.

[BBA]

I read the 80 GIG Maxtor 5400 RPM drive outperforms the 60 GIG 7200 RPM drives, this due to data density and number of platters making a higher effect on throughput than the increased rotational speed of older technology.

How many of you have a drive that does a sustained 46 MB/Sec? The Maxtor 80 Gig 5400 RPM does.

[wildchild978]

All you need to do is look at a spec comparison to see the difference between the different drives, but while you're there, compare them to SCSI HDDs. If you're really after a fast HDD SCSI is the way to go.

[ragtop]

The article that Fingers linked doesn't specifically draw a conclusion on the 5400 vs 7200 question, but if you review and compare the tables yourself it shows that the 7200 RPM drive is 20% faster in random access time, and 30% faster in copying a large file.

The only question is whether you will notice the difference in real world applications and whether the difference is worth the price. My guess is that you will notice a significant difference when launching apps or copying files, but not much difference once the application is running. As far as whether its worth the price - I guess that depends on how fat your wallet is.

[This message has been edited by ragtop (edited 05-30-2001).]

[Richard_Cranium72]

As BBA said, the numbers don't always add up.

Here's a link for some interesting reading..

I'm sorta like a old member, Arni-Lee, waiting for FMD, Translucent Optical Discs with storage capacity of nearly unbelievable porportions..

http://www.storagereview.com/

[clickplay]

Something that I didn't see mentioned was the
old drives ata?Was it 33,66?And the new drive ata 100?That's where I see the difference in accessing the hard drive for files,when I went from an 8.4 gig (5200) ata 33 to a 30 gig (7200) ATA 100.This is one reason some people choose raid,so that they can double their xfer rate (if the appropriate raid schem is enabled).I.E. I could get an ATA rate of 200 with my current drive-if of course I could justify the cost of another drive and a raid card for my home entertainment.

[Ruahrc]

Just a new side to the question- are 7200 rpm drives hotter/louder than their 5400rpm counterparts? I'm thinking of going 7200 if there is a sale, but don't want another jet engine in my computer.

Ruahrc

[jray]

Yes, they seem to run hotter, the noise I don't consider an issue (but then I my hearing ain't so great anyway..)I have noticed that they seem to run hotter.

I've noticed a big difference in how fast defrag runs on these ATA100/7200's...It downright haul's u-no-what!

On a related note of interest, here at work we have put many Maxtor 7200/20g's in new systems in the past few months. Also had almost an entire case of them fail 1 by 1 anywhere from a couple of days, to 4 weeks after installation in new systems; Maxtor says it must be due to rough handling during shipping. (We've sinced switched to W.D.'s). Prior to that we've used 5-6 cases without the high failure rate.

[bdj]

One thing to consider is if you need to do alot of continuous, streaming, reads and writes. An example, non-linear digital video or audio editing. Some Firewire boards recommend drives at 10KRPM.

[OuTpaTienT]

Interesting article there Fingers. It's not really about the 5400 vs. 7200 issue but it is comparing ATA33 vs. ATA66. And they find that ATA66 has absolutely no advantage over ATA33, even using the faster spinning 7200 drives. So one has to wonder why is there even an ATA100 spec, it's obviously not needed until we have MUCH faster drive hardware.

[crunchyriff]

For me, YES! There is a BIG difference.
I went from a 8.4Gb Maxtor 5400 DMA33 to a 60Gb Maxtor 7200 RPM ATA100 (w/Promise controller card)...WOW!
Not only does it load the OS faster, it loads apps much faster, too. My brother-in- law, (who's an ex Navy telecomm tech), was shocked at the performance of my sys. Said it's "the fastest **** PII400 he's ever seen"- and he's now in networking. No, my PC isn't overclocked. (I'm about to upgrade to PIII 1Ghz, why bother?)
I'm not gonna get in a pee-pee match about what brand is better. There are some fine offerings out there. But I am happy with my Maxtor.
7200RPM ATA100? Gotta love it!

[poweroid]

We are UK experts in hard disk performance. See: http://www.bestpricecomputers.ltd.uk/products/tests.htm

We do thousands of tests every month on hard disks. While we don't post extensive results (like Anandtech and Dr Tom) we do keep records of the results for our own internal use (and to keep us ahead in the UK market :-) ).

7200 rpm IDE disks are certainly faster, but some are a lot faster than others. The IBMs are superior by a wide margin. WD and SG Barracudda seem to be the slowest 7200s. Note here that other issues (like enabling DMA, using the right cable etc) do impact. See: http://www.bestpricecomputers.ltd.uk/profile/perform2.htm

Surprisingly SCSI disks are not showing up faster than the IBM IDE 7200 deskstars. Even the 10K rpm scsi ultra 160 don't record a significantly higher disk winmark (Disk Winmark is not infallible so we do use other speed tests as well) than a 7200 IDE! Contrary to some comments here I don't believe that IDE disks come in 10,000 rpm (or is that Firewire?).

When it comes to striping (RAID): Striping to 2x7200 will give you a big boost over just using one 7200. Striping to 4 hard disks instead of 2 doesn't present any speed advantages and the differences between 2x5400 and 2x7200 is not as much as the difference between standard 5400 vs 7200 rpm disks.

THE ATA100 is of course a big joke. No hard disk comes near the 100 MB/sec transfer rate. More important is the IDE controller. The Promise controller on motherboards like the old Asus A7V is actually substantially faster than the VIA 686B southbridge on AMD 761 chipset motherboards, or ANYTHING in the Intel range of motherboards.

The Highpoint RAID controllers give a slightly better striping performance than similar Promise IDE RAID controllers. Suggestion: Don't buy the RAID controller on its own. Motherboards like Abit's KT7A RAID include the HPT controller on board.

Let me stop babbling now :-)

Comments, challenges, suggestions? I look forward to them.

Webmaster www.bestpricecomputers.ltd.uk (http://www.bestpricecomputers.ltd.uk)

[MTAtech]

I agree with all of you who said 7200's are faster than 5400's. All the research shows the same thing. It was also my experience when I changed to 7200 and cloned my old drive onto the new one.

In addition, most 7200 drives are also ATA66 or ATA100 while older 5400's are usually ATA33. This gives potentially* more performance. (When using ATA66/100 one must use a 80 wire cable and the motherboard must support the higher transfer rate.)

*As poweroid said, drives haven't achieved ATA100 transfer rates yet but I believe they are greater than ATA33 rates. Therefore, there should be some improvement.

[This message has been edited by MTAtech (edited 05-31-2001).]

[PaulG]

Hi,guys,

It is interesting what you wrote in this "nobody knows what's about" matter.
ATA interface speeds.
The given rates (33,66,100) are the max.transfer rates usually quoted for the electronics the HDD's are equipped with, mechanical transfer potential is much less, hence the speed increase from 5,400 to 7K2 or 10K.
Look www.tomshardware.com (http://www.tomshardware.com) for comparisons of recent HDD's in all above speed branches.
Finally it seems the current available mechanical limit is around the 50 Mb/s mostly seen from the newest 30-60 GB models where the number of platters is higher.
However, I would like to emphasize an other issue which is almost as interesting as the original question (sorry, but it is about how to choose the right HDD for myself). Particularly, the noise. It's common that a higher speed HDD is noisier, taking the bearing's noise but it is less disturbing than the seeking krrrraaakk-krrrraaaak.
Recently I bought 5-6 HDD's (WD 7200, 20GB, 15,3GB, Quantum 7200 30GB, IBM SCSI 7200 10,2 GB, and now a Fujitsu 5400 rpm 20,3 GB)
Best of all the 5400 rpm Fujitsu, quick like hell - yes, this is the quickest, see later -and very-very quiet.
Working on my "build the quietest PC possible" project I choosen the latter with a Transcend TS-ASL-3 mobo (Intel 815 chipset).I have decreased the speed of my PIII to 600 (orig. it was o/c to 900@133) and soldered the cpu-fan's ground cable to +5V for less fan noise.
I use Win98 again (not SE !!! ) and see wonder! the system is the quickest I have ever built. Boot time is somewhat like with ME and all the operation is immediate.
I tried all the combinations with different HDD's, chipsets (Intel,Via) mobos, cpu's and RAM's.
Conclusion is it's like a synergy, some HDD's work better with particular chipsets, the newest HDD's are quicker than older ones and offer higher capacity for almost the same price and you can choose even a really quiet one.
Taking the rest, in the real world applications the difference is marginal and not worth the cost difference.
All the new drives are quick enough to forget this factor (be sure of 2MB buffer), look at capacity, noise and warranty(reliability).

[bwlegan]

I think you'll find that the newer 7200s have shorter access times.

When booting up the system you have a lot of head movement with relatively small amounts of data being trandferred. Possibly similar in some games. No! probably not, you dump as much as possible into RAM. Anyway, under these conditions, access time is the critical factor, with respect to throughput.

General purpose HDDs still have access times at about 10ms. My 7200, has been timed at between 5, and 6ms. It makes a big difference to your defrag time.

[elroy]

IN REGARDS TO NOISE: I just read that the ATA100 spec includes noise specs. Maxtor has a utility called "amset" [accoustic management settings] With this utility you can set your HD to LOUD-fastest, QUIETER-pretty fast, or SILENT-kinda slow. The article I read said the middle setting barely hurt performance while the silent setting cut performance by 35%. They also said that this is part of the ATA100 spec and applies to all the brands of ATA100 drives. One other thing to take note of is that Maxtor is shipping all their drives in the SILENT mode so they come with poor speed performance right out of the box. Other brands are shipped in the faster modes. The author said he had successfully used Maxtor's amset utility on other brand drives too, but this is at your own risk of course. Wish I knew where I read this...... online somewhere.

[edtrip]

Crunchyriff writes......
"For me, YES! There is a BIG difference.
I went from a 8.4Gb Maxtor 5400 DMA33 to a 60Gb Maxtor 7200 RPM ATA100 (w/Promise controller card)...WOW!"

I'd like to know which of those two factors is a BIGGER influence, going 5400 to 7200, OR going from udma33 to ultra100?
I would definitely guess the latter.

Early this year I put a 15gb quantum 7200 in my PC and I definitely see improved boot time, faster loads and quicker defrags. But hell, I'd hope so, I was replacing a 3yr old WD 2.5 gb that maxed out at, I think, PIO mode4. So even in this case, where's the real improvement lie, in the faster spindle speed OR in DOUBLE the throughput?
Now I've added a WD 8.4 5400 as a slave and it loads pretty fast too.

[My drives, though both udma66 are on a super7 mobo and maxed out at udma33]

My question is this..... Would I see a substantial improvement if I went with the 100/66 IDE cable and a Promise 66 card?
(and it's almost a stupid question, because on the basis of what I've just said, it seems like a no brainer)

[booya]

about the guy sayin that there is a big difference of price between 7200 and 5400

my awnser is i just bought 2 40 gig 7200 rpm ata100 maxtor diamondmax 60 series for 170 can each heheh no tax and since they sell 235 in stor and with the tax about 275 hehe i got a free 110 $ rebate lol do not buy in store :p

[ColinTofCairns]

An issue not addressed in this discussion is the difference between operating temperatures of the two drives. The 7.2K rpm HD generates significantly more heat than that of the 5.4K rpm HD. This is an important installation and/or purchasing consideration if one lives/works in a hot & humid environment without airconditioning.
During the monsoon season (the "Wet season") my working environment regularly attains ambient temperatures of 40+°C (104+°F). Consequently, in a hot environment a system that generates the least heat during operation must prevail.

[LiLRiceBoi]

There is a noticable difference.

If you havent compaired a 7200 and 5400 you will be surprised at the difference.

[zferenczy]

I did not notice any difference, exept when I bought 4 of 15 gig hard drives with in 30 day 2 of them died, so I had to return them. The replacement is working fine, but in my opinion it is not worth the extra money.

[wyvrn]

edtrip,

If you read this article (http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cfm?ArticleID=RWT011701000000) (which had already been posted in this thread), you will see that the rotational speed makes more of a difference than the ATA spec. To quote:

What does it take to get a higher sustained transfer? It requires faster rotational speed and/or greater areal density. This is the main reason why today’s hard disks have better performance: higher rotational speed and packing of the data tighter on fewer and smaller platters. Today’s 7200-RPM ATA/100 hard disk show a very marginal loss when set to ATA/33 and perform pretty much the same if set to ATA/66 mode due to the sustained data transfer rate being roughly the same, or at best, slightly higher. This is also why a 7200-RPM hard disk is quite a bit faster than a 5400-RPM unit regardless of its ATA mode. Denser packing of the data on the platters (greater areal density) is also why some newer 5400-RPM ATA/100 hard disk can perform close to that of an older 7200 RPM ATA/66 hard disk.

[This message has been edited by wyvrn (edited 06-04-2001).]

[Fat|Tony]

Well, i've got an 8 gig 5400 and a 40 gig 7200, and the only place it really makes a noticable difference for me is when i'm moving things from hd to hd. now unless your time is really that precious you don't need a 7200, but i think if it's the only hd (or all are 7200) it will shave a little time off of your startup, again only worth it if your time is really that precious.

I should also note that i THINK i'm running ata66, but i'm not sure, but this should all be relative anyways, and i got my 40gig for $125 at a computer show about 6 months ago =P

[the_Guy]

Sorry I didn't notice this thread sooner.

In support of Poweroids comments about the supperior speed of IBM drives:

I just built an OC'd KT7A-RAID with a 700 Duron @980m & ata100/WD drives and I rebuilt a BX6 Rev2(over 2 years old) with a 700 PIII @933m using a 2.5 year old promise ata66 card with IBM drives.

Using the SiSoft Sandra HardDrive benchmark, to my surprise- the IBMs were considerably faster.

All drives are 7200

[gecoffin]

Have a ATA66 5400 WD 2meg buffer and a 7200 ATA100 Maxtor 2 meg buffer. Beside benching
being faster, In the real world, hard to tell the differance running on my Asus CUSL2-C motherboard

Gary

[Andy_L]

I dont think it is realistic to globally compare 5400 and 7200 rpm drives, because there is a great deal of difference, speed noise and heat, between a 2 year old design and a 2 month old design. And there are very fast, quiet drives in one series and lousy drives in another series from the same manufacturer. I do think its safe to say that usually IBM drives are quieter across the boards, but that doesnt mean that a drive from another manufacturer may not be as quiet or quieter. I think that Wyvrn's quote pretty much says it all.

[Warthog]

I can't believe this thread is still going.

Questions we should ask ourselves:

- Do I notice a difference?

OR

- Is their a difference?

These are two completely separate questions.

As others have said, when stating your opinion, also state what controllers, etc that have also changed.

Personally, I noticed a difference in speed and the price gap isn't that much (IMHO) that we need to have a thread with 50something replies to it http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

Warthog

[jad1097]

I also went from a 8.4 GB Maxtor 5,400 ATA66 to a 30GB 7,200ATA66 and there was a huge difference. The ATA did not make a single bit of difference because at the time I was using a board that only supported ATA33. When I went to a ATA 100 board I saw very little change in performance. I added a 20GB 5,400 ATA 100 Maxtor and it is definitely slower than the 30.



Wart make that 53 :p

[Fingers]

The hard drive is probably the single biggest "bottleneck" on a PC, so everything you can do to improve HDD performance is a major improvement. A 7200 with similar design features as a 5400 should be at least 10% faster... that's a major improvement, IMO.

ATA66/100 just doesn't offer the kind of performance gain that its name implies. Other members results (see above), as well as my two links on the first page of this thread indicate the flaws in current implementation of "fastest" ATA modes.

Ahem... 54 http://www.sysopt.com/forum/wink.gif

[Warthog]

darn it stop replying http://www.sysopt.com/forum/wink.gif

shoot...55

Warthog

[OC Guy]

I have heard nothing but good things about 72,000 and 74,000 or 75,000rpm hdds.

[Warthog]

Are you from planet Zadok? I wish I could get a hold of 74,000 rpm hard drives....imagine how fast that would go. We mere Earthlings only have 7,400 rpm IDE drives.

Warthog

[MTAtech]

The point is becoming moot. I see fewer and fewer 5400's available for sale and it only a matter of time before they are phased out entirely and 7200 will be the standard.

My next HD will be a 10,000 rpm.

[OC Guy]

Personally, I'd go with the 7200 or maybe even a 7400 rpm hdd.

[OC Guy]

Personally, I'd go with the 7200 or maybe even a 7400 rpm hdd.