It sounds like you didn't partition them correctly, and the 4k sectors were not aligned.
It sounds like I didn't partition them AT ALL, because I never had neither of them in my physical possession, nor did I claim to.
Have you noticed that you are STILL assuming way too much, even after you've been made aware of said personality flaw?
(That was a rhetorical question)
If you don't understand the importance of areal density vs. rpm, you'll never grasp drive performance. If you did, you'd know there are plenty of 5400 rpm drives with higher transfer rates than 7200 drives.
If you don't understand the importance of listening when people that AREN'T you are talking, you'll never grasp the concept of listening > processing > reacting LOGICALLY.
While I haven't tried EVERY 5400 rpm drive known to man, I have used SEVERAL - BOTH of which claimed ON PAPER higher transfer rates than my reliable entry-level Toshiba 7200 rpm SATA drives - and both of which performed at a level FAR BELOW that of said Toshibas.
LAG CITY
UNUSABLE FOR MY APPLICATION
!SLOWER!
Understand?
I certainly hope so, because I will NOT be explaining it again.
I think RJP said it best when he said the following:
As I said before, I wouldn't use them for anything other than backups. The performance hits that come from trying to save every last milliwatt are more trouble than they're worth.
INDEED,
- kobi.
liveween.comWEENTV