RAID Cache - 32 MB vs 256 MB

Question

I recently needed to purcahse a RAID for video editing at work. However, despite my suggestions, the people making the purchase failed to consult with me before making the final decision and ended up purchasing a Rocstor 8TB RAID from Apple. I have no complaints about the size of the RAID or even the brand, but the cache is 32 MB. OWC sells an identical 8TB model for the same price, but the cache is 256 MB. Is it worth returning to Apple and purchasing from OWC? These are non-enterprise grade drives in the RAID as well.
If drives factor in, the Rocstor has Hitachi in them. I'm not sure what OWC puts in theirs.

Answer 1

256Mb will not make it last any longer than the 128Mb version of this card for many reasons.
1) The most important reason is that they are both clocked at same frequencies 310Mhz for the core and I think 310Mhz for the memory (forgot the memory clock) but its the same on both 128Mb and 256Mb cards. So there is no difference in speed, just quantity of memory.
2) If the game requires 256Mb VRAM to store textures (which only some new games require at very high resolutions 1600x1200 and above and maxed out settings) chances are that game will only run at 10fps slideshow because this GPU is not that capable. Now if you had a 7800gtx thats very capable then 256Mb would be very handy. x1600 in the MBP is actually slightly slower than 6600GT which only comes with 128Mb.
tribe, you giving your advice solely based on the VRAM and those are the people who fall for video cards like Geforce 6200 512MB that can't even run oblivion.
The x1600 256Mb is not clocked faster than 128Mb and when gaming if graphics are complex enough to require 256Mb of memory for storing textures then chances are it will run at less than 15frames/sec. Overall you can expect a 5-10% speed gain which is pretty much not noticable to your eyes.
MacBook Pro 1.83Ghz 1GB RAM   Mac OS X (10.4.6)