Does anyone know for a fact if the 10K rpm drive are actually about 30% faster than the 7200 rpm everything else being the same, or is there more than can meet the eye in the world of drive rotational speeds ?
In other work is the upgrade really worth the price difference for streaming and track count with audio sequencers ?
On a 15,000 scsi you\'ll get a higher sustained throughput but the maximum throughput may be less than even a good 7,200 IDE, so there can be a trade-off.
I\'m not sure how this affects working with giga, because I don\'t know whether faster bursts are more important than a fast sustained stream.
10,000 ide should be better than 7,200 but there are always other factors. The Western Digital with the 8MB cache seems to get rave reviews and I doubt that the increase in speed of another drive would be all that significant (unless they have the \'same\' model souped up).
This is something that Tascam could really help with. One would hope that at some point they could at least choose a few candidate drives and get some real numbers for us. As it is, with the combination of factors that define a drive\'s performance within giga, we have to rely on anecdotal information.
It souldn\'t be too difficult for Tascam to isolate drive performance and make recommendations accordingly. As this seems to be the crucial component of \'good\' performance, one would hope that they could assign someone for a couple of weeks with 3.0 and finally produce some kind of chart we could work off.
I don\'t think this is an unreasonable request. As it is, it\'s as if they just throw in the towel beyond a \'minimum recommended\' system spec.
As faster drives become available it would be nice to get an answer to your question from those with the means to \'be in the know\'.