. . . A tough question. I have the same problem myself as I'm looking for a 320gb replacement of my fast but too small 7k200 (100gb). Seems all 320gb drives have a slight problem with access times probably because of the higher density. None can match the 14.x ms (including latency) of the old 7k200. They all end up between 15.5ms and 17ms. These are values of 5400 3.5" desktop drives. Especially the 7200.3 is disappointing here since it has the highest STR and Seagate usually has very good access times . . . But all drives are very close so you probably won't feel a difference during normal day use. I'm tempted to wait a few more months for the 7200.4 available with up to 500gb.
If your 7K200 is the 100Gb-per-platter jobbie, these measures [from a respectable-enough OSX benching utility that'll be unfamiliar to you, with its own 'Nix & OSX quirks]
may be of interest.
1) each HDD attached via the same ICH7R channel to the same box
2) each HDD newly partitioned/formatted to single/GUID/HFS+ [a journalled scheme]
3) 7K200 has Apple firmware [as can pretty obviously be seen]
. . FWIW [Macbook Pros have pretty good monitoring h/w & s/w]
over the average working day the 7200.3 is if anything cooler than the best-in-class 7K200 by around 1C or a little better, & is about equally noisy/quiet
Edited by shoarthing, 31 August 2008 - 07:01 AM.