IDE HDD: 16MB cache or ATA133?

I am considering buying a new HDD (parallel ATA, about 400-500 GB).
It looks that most disks have either 8MB cache with ATA100 or 16MB
with ATA133.
Which combination is better? I mean, which is more important for the
HDD performance - cache size (8 or 16 MB) or connection speed (100 vs.
133 ATA)?

 

It all depends upon usage pattern and other drive parameters (number of
heads, rpms). For storing large files ... like dvd images, movies and maybe
mp3s/pictures for direct "streaming" access, the cache size is not that
much important as continuous transfer speed. For booting a OS, or even more
database storage with lots of seeks and random access pattern, the cache
size and head positioning speed both rule.

 

Just a footnote. It wouldn't help much to get ATA133 if the motherboard
doesn't support it.

 

Of course it does, that is why I am asking

 

Okay, after hearing that it's probably compatible, I'd go with the
faster transfer rate and larger cache. But don't expect miracles.
Today's hard drives are so fast that it takes some application that is
intensely hard drive specific to make the difference noticeable. I
remember times when it was a far off dream to get a 9GB SCSI drive
because they were so fast and could hold all the data on Earth, but were
very expensive. Now Walmart has drives that would put them to shame for
pocket change.

 

You're most lilely not to see a noticable difference either way. It
often depends on the file sizes that are being transferred and/or the
speed of your current in box HDDs and current pc setup/background apps
running at the same time.