waltchan said:Which one makes more sense, a 250 GB hard drive or a 500 GB hard drive? If I select the 500 GB hard drive, will it slow down the computer's performance a little?
Atlasland said:No.
The only question is do you need the extra storage. Don't worry about relative speeds.
puckhead193 said:Can a user upgrade the hard easily on the iMac?
if so and your not that computer literate and don't want to open the computer up and install a new hard drive when that fills ups get the 500 GB
waltchan said:Let's say I bought a 500 GB iMac. If there is 400 GB on storage right, how is the perfomance in terms of speed when comparing to a 250 GB with 150 GB in it? Isn't it much slower because there is too much stuff added into the computer. I know when I add more things into my PC computer, the speed slows down.
appleretailguy said:No no no no...A computer's performance has NOTHING to do with the amount of data on its hard drive (unless the hard drive is, say, 99% full, leaving no room for virtual memory or swap files).
The PC slow down you experience is most likely a fragmented disk, and has NOTHING to do with the amount of files you have saved.
i know read/write speed is generally higher due to increased data density/more platters, but i've never heard that.TMA said:I thought latency/seek times can be slightly higher on bigger drives but the difference wouldn't be noticeable. Correct me if I'm wrong.
So a 500 GB hard drive is more likely to fail or crash than a 250 GB hard drive? Is the lifespan shorter?Kingsly said:I would get the 500 Gbyte, but remember: thats 500 Gbytes that can potentially fail. Backup often!
No. Its just that much more data that can be lost.waltchan said:So a 500 GB hard drive is more likely to fail or crash than a 250 GB hard drive? Is the lifespan shorter?
Homerjward is correct about larger drives generally being faster from the increased data density. Testing on Tomshardware.com has shown the transfer rates to be higher especially with large files. These larger drives usually have 16mb cache while the 250 and below usually have 8mb cache helping the larger drives even more performance wise. Look at the Seagate 7200.7 160gb versus a Seagate 7200.8 400GB in this test, it's about 30-40% faster in some areas. http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/10...00_gb_gets_ready_to_face_the_world/page4.htmlhomerjward said:i know read/write speed is generally higher due to increased data density/more platters, but i've never heard that.
no, he's just stating that, in the event of a disk failure, you lose more data from the 500gb drive than the 250gb one.waltchan said:So a 500 GB hard drive is more likely to fail or crash than a 250 GB hard drive? Is the lifespan shorter?
Eraserhead said:It's not to do with the formatting at all...
<Start Maths lesson>
Basically Hard drive manufacturers say that 1kilo byte is 1000 bytes, however the operating system says that 1kilo byte is 2^10 or 1024 bytes, this scales up for Megabytes and Gigabytes respectively. So basically a 160GB hard drive has 160 000 000 000 bytes on it, but when converted into operating system Gigabytes this is only 149GB, often the hard drive manufacturers are a little generous so you get a disk that is slightly bigger than this figure, but still less than 160GB.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigabyte for more information.
<end Maths lesson>
iphil said:What I was saying in my post #18 is You should always expect to lose between 5% and 10% of hard-drive space after formatting because some ppl believe that its the amount on the box is after formatting ..
i was trying to keep the terminology simple for n00bs etc ..![]()
![]()
I hope this is a joke.Stridder44 said:What?? Speed doesn't correspond to how big your HardDrive is?
I always turn down the brightness on my monitor to save on system RAM. Sometimes I unplug the mouse and keyboard whenever running processor-intensive applications.