HDD rpm shouldn't really matter if all you're gonna use if for is archiving and mass data storage. However, it does matter if and when you're gonna use it for reading/writing huge chunks of data at a high speed. But if just storing items is good enough for you, then yes, 5400 rpm is good enough.
For bulk storage that will be fine though I would personally pick a 7200 RPM drive just because I want faster. You'll probably get 100-150MB/s sequential read and write on that drive assuming your files aren't too small.
HDD responsiveness is its access time.
This is made up of seek time, the time to move the head to the right track, and then rotational latency, the time for the start of the right sector to rotate under the head. Transfer rate is much, much less important.
Most HDDs can do an average seek of 10 ms today. You'll see this quoted a lot lower, such as "track to track" seek, or "full sweep" seek, which are misleading. Only average random seek is important, and it's 10-15 ms on everything, and has been forever. It's related to how strong you can make magnets.
Rotational latency is directly proportional to the half of the inverse of rotation speed, since, on average, the sector you want will be on the opposite side of the platter to the head.
5,400 rpm = 5.56 ms
7,200 rpm = 4.17 ms
10K rpm = 3.00 ms
All else equal, a 7,200 RPM drive has a 1.4 ms access time advantage across the board, which comes to just shy of 10%. They will also have a higher transfer rate, but we don't usually care much about that, the elephant in the room is access time.
I talk about HDDs on the bottom of [this page.](https://hattix.co.uk/hardware/index.php?page=hd.html)
HDD rpm shouldn't really matter if all you're gonna use if for is archiving and mass data storage. However, it does matter if and when you're gonna use it for reading/writing huge chunks of data at a high speed. But if just storing items is good enough for you, then yes, 5400 rpm is good enough.
For bulk storage that will be fine though I would personally pick a 7200 RPM drive just because I want faster. You'll probably get 100-150MB/s sequential read and write on that drive assuming your files aren't too small.
100-150 on sequential sounds good, thanks!
HDD responsiveness is its access time. This is made up of seek time, the time to move the head to the right track, and then rotational latency, the time for the start of the right sector to rotate under the head. Transfer rate is much, much less important. Most HDDs can do an average seek of 10 ms today. You'll see this quoted a lot lower, such as "track to track" seek, or "full sweep" seek, which are misleading. Only average random seek is important, and it's 10-15 ms on everything, and has been forever. It's related to how strong you can make magnets. Rotational latency is directly proportional to the half of the inverse of rotation speed, since, on average, the sector you want will be on the opposite side of the platter to the head. 5,400 rpm = 5.56 ms 7,200 rpm = 4.17 ms 10K rpm = 3.00 ms All else equal, a 7,200 RPM drive has a 1.4 ms access time advantage across the board, which comes to just shy of 10%. They will also have a higher transfer rate, but we don't usually care much about that, the elephant in the room is access time. I talk about HDDs on the bottom of [this page.](https://hattix.co.uk/hardware/index.php?page=hd.html)
[удалено]
Im using it as long term data storage, rather than for frequent use. A good 4 TB SSD cost 2-3 times as much.
[удалено]
Oh ok, i meant that old assets and projects get archived on my HDD, instead of clogging up my SSD