NCQ OR Bigger Cache
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: NCQ OR Bigger Cache

  1. #1
    Registered User eedmond's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    342

    NCQ OR Bigger Cache

    OK, I am looking at getting a new HD. Should I go with a WD Caviar SE16 with 16mb cache with no NCQ or a Seagate Barracuda ST3250823AS with a 8mb cache with NCQ (I would also have to get a Promise SATA300 TX4 controller since my MB (ABIT NF7-S Rev 2) does not support NCQ).

    It will hold EQ2 and primarly used for gaming.

    Thanks.

  2. #2
    Registered User CeeBee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,494
    I have seen an interesting article recently, looks like NCQ doesn't help at all in a single-user environment (on the contrary, hurts the performance slightly). Most benchmarks show these 16MB WD drives as being better than the 8MB Seagate.

  3. #3
    Registered User eedmond's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    342
    Well I bought the 16mb Cache WD. We will see how it does.

    Thanks.

Similar Threads

  1. How do I Change an L3 Cache Back Into An L2 cache?
    By Orangeman in forum BIOS/Motherboard Drivers
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: April 26th, 2002, 03:53 AM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: August 10th, 2001, 01:11 AM
  3. [RESOLVED] Higher video performance with more L2 cache?
    By FrankJ in forum Video Adapter/Monitor Drivers
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: October 12th, 2000, 01:42 PM
  4. Flaky video can simulate bad CPU cache
    By theBeast in forum Tech Tips
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: August 17th, 2000, 08:07 AM
  5. [RESOLVED] Fic, PA-2013 2meg cache, win95
    By smoffett in forum Windows 95/98/98SE/ME
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: April 27th, 1999, 08:11 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •