Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

250gb hd @ 7200 vs. 500gb hd @ 5400?

Depends what you are planning on using your computer for. The 7200 obviously gives you faster access to your data than the 5400. Personally I use a 7200 in my MBP and am enjoying the access speeds which I imagine would be slower if I had a 5400.
 
You might want to look at the current draw on the Segate 500 gb drive.

My MBP-13 came with the Apple 250 gb 5400 drive, which draws 700 ma. I replaced it with a WD 320 gb 7200 rpm drive that draws 550 ma. The WD is faster and draws considerably less current.

Short of an SSD (high cost, relatively low capacity), WD makes some of the larger drives in their Velociraptor series with low current draw, a consideration when away from the power lines.
 
Do you want 250 Gb more of capacity or a slight increase in performance (and I mean very slight).

Having used both the 7200 RPM and 5400 RPM drives in my MBP, I would say that there is not much of a difference between the two in performance (at least for day-to-day tasks like web browsing, document writing, Vmware using, bootcamp using, etc.). I don't do any video editing, so maybe you will see something there.

The only thing I have noticed is the Applications folder opens slighty (a couple milliseconds) faster with the 7200 rpm drive, and expose moves the windows slightly faster (same order of magnitude).

Then again, I have the click-beep issue with the 7200 rpm drive so I don't know if that is causing a problem
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back