Though there are larger drives available, they do not fit into everyones budget. Simply going from 500GB to 320GB cuts the price in half, which makes this almost a steal. We will compare with one of our recently reviewed 500GB drives and see how it stacks up.
|
|
Throughout all of our benchmarks regardless of what we are reviewing, testing is done in a clean and stand-alone version of Windows XP Professional with SP2. Prior to testing, these conditions are met:
If you are interested in using the same benchmarks as us, feel free to visit the developers website:
The testing rig used for today’s benchmarking is as follows:
I will be comparing this 320GB drive to the previously reviewed 500GB Seagate 7200.9 drive. Now, there will be differences between the two drives in the tests, because the 320GB is a newer 7200.10 model. Still, this is a comparison between a $95 drive and a $260 one. Things should be interesting!
As expected, the 320GB cleaned up here, but even moreso than I expected in the average read tests. The 7200.10 drive scored a full 14MB/s better then the 500GB. Impressive… that’s a 21% increase. Nothing to scoff at, for sure.

Here is where differences between HD Tach and HD Tune become evident. The results varied quite a bit in the previous test, but here they are so close it’s scary. All of the read tests were -identical- to one another, but started to sway a bit with the Latency and Burst. It wouldn’t even be right to conclude a winner here… they are the same.

The exact same goes for our Sandra and PC Mark tests. The only thing that proved different was the PC Mark score, a mere 0.05% difference.

|
|