Unsolved
This post is more than 5 years old
5 Posts
0
8779
300GB vs 900GB 10k 2.5 hard drives
We started off using 300GB 10k 2.5 hard drives. Looking back now we wish we would have started bigger with 600 or even 900GB drives. Is there a performance difference between a 300GB 10K drive and a 900GGB 10K drive?
DELL-Sam L
Moderator
Moderator
•
6.9K Posts
0
May 24th, 2013 11:00
Hello lumeanatti,
With 900gb drives you may see a little performance hit at first. But depending on your san if you have caching enabled then i don’t believe you will be able to see the difference.
Please let us know if you have any other questions.
Dev Mgr
9.3K Posts
0
May 24th, 2013 11:00
IOPS wise the drives will be pretty much the same performance. A different disk cache size may make a small impact and the higher data density may increase sequential read/write speed.
Overall you'd just get about the same performance.
The thing to keep in mind though is that if you get 3 times larger drives, you'll probably put 3 times as much data on there and that means usually more IO. So if your drives are currently nearly maxed in the IOPS that they can do, larger drives is not the best choice (instead you go with more or faster drives).