Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > Mac Pro

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Dec 19, 2012, 09:03 PM   #1
camner
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
WD Blue faster than Black? Can this really make sense?

I bought a couple of 1TB WD Blue drives for backup purposes (WD10EZEX) and a 1TB WD Black for boot drive purposes (WD1002FAEX) and before putting them into service I ran Diglloyd DiskTester on them (primarily to see if they were duds or good).

Much to my surprise, both the read and write speeds on the Blues were significantly faster than on the Black (read = 185 Blue on outer tracks vs read = 128 Black on outer tracks). Both Blues tested the same.

I also have a slightly older 1TB WD Black (WD1001FALS) whose performance is essentially identical to the newer Black.

The Diglloyd test writes (and then reads back) 1000 files of approximately 1GB each, and, of course, the read/write speeds slow down as the drive gets to the inner tracks.

I then ran BlackMagicDesign DiskSpeedTest on the drives, and had essentially the same results: the WD Blacks had read/write speeds of approx 125MB/sec and the Blues 175MB/sec.

Finally, I ran AJA System Test on the drives, and again, exactly the same results (~175MB/sec Blue vs ~125MB/sec Black).

This makes no sense to me. I can't see why/how the new Blues should be faster than the (new and older) Blacks.

Am I missing something obvious?

(I should mention that prior to running the tests I erased the drives so all the writes were being done on a completely blank drive)
camner is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 19, 2012, 09:53 PM   #2
Mr. Retrofire
macrumors 601
 
Mr. Retrofire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: www.emiliana.cl
Quote:
Originally Posted by camner View Post
Am I missing something obvious?
Probably:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_...on_performance

Or you have tested the wrong HDD.
__________________

“Only the dead have seen the end of the war.”
-- Plato --
Mr. Retrofire is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 19, 2012, 10:03 PM   #3
derbothaus
macrumors 601
 
derbothaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Apparently that is correct numbers.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1297633/w...-platter-drive

They have higher access times than the blacks and database may be slower than a black but the 1GB platter density rules until the Blacks get 1TB platters at least for streaming operations and bandwidth. The 1TB velociraptor would still feel faster as a boot drive, for instance. Maybe a great RAID media set if they can last.
__________________
Mac Pro W3680, GTX 680, 12GB DDR3, SSD; MBP, 2.6GHz Core i7, 16GB DDR3, SSD; Eizo fs2333
derbothaus is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 19, 2012, 11:40 PM   #4
camner
Thread Starter
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Thanks to all for your replies.

So, the issue is that the Blue has 1TB/platter and the Black has 500GB/platter, correct? Greater density = faster transfer speed

So, the question is which to use for my "data" drive? I'm going to install an SSD for the boot drive. The "data" drive will have VMs, my digital pics, the iTunes Music folder, etc.

Which is more important? The seek times or the transfer times? I'm guessing that with the possible exception of the VMs, the faster seek time will make things feel snappier than the faster transfer time....or do I not understand this well?
camner is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 20, 2012, 12:15 AM   #5
LeicaM8
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: West Michigan
Uhm...
I'd say that What matters, if these drives are going to be your archive drives, is that the drives be of a high grade and a more reliable design. As in: what's the use of the cheaper Blue drives having faster throughput than the Blacks if the Blues are designed and manufactured in such a way that makes them likelier to fail sooner than the Blacks. Save 20-30 bucks &/or gain some efficiencies in the near term, but at cost of putting your data at risk &/or the fuss and bother of rescuing it or rebuilding it. Trust me, avoid the latter at all costs. I'm hip deep in sorting out a problem just one more good hard drive around would have prevented.
That's my thoughts anyway,
Your Mileage May Vary,
Not Valid In California,
LSMFT.

Richard in Michigan
LeicaM8 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2012, 02:23 AM   #6
makaveli559m
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
The Caviar editions are the best of WDs out there I would try to get one of those and the Caviar also take a lot of beatings lol
__________________
15" MBP (mid 2010) Core i5 2.40GHz, 8GB RAM, 500GB Momentus XT Hybrid HD, Nvidia GT330m/ Intel HD.
makaveli559m is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2012, 05:37 AM   #7
DPUser
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Redundancy is a good thing when it comes to back ups... you can be black and blue and still not sing the blues when your data ends up in a black hole. Point? Have multiple backups, no matter which drive you use for what. I run an external drive pair, rotated on and off site, for Time Machine in addition to manuel nightly backups to internal drives. Clients are less happy to pay when their session is lost forever.
DPUser is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2012, 03:29 PM   #8
derbothaus
macrumors 601
 
derbothaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
I'd still get a Caviar Black as they have better response times for a coupled data drive AFAIK. There isn't much info on those blues. I have a WD Green that takes ages to respond and a Raptor that my user folder is on and it is super snappy but the green matches it in streaming bandwidth numbers (7ms vs. 18ms-25ms) Use the drive with the best operations per second as your main data drive. Big sequential numbers don't matter as much as response for this purpose as the intent to to be an invisible "bridge".
__________________
Mac Pro W3680, GTX 680, 12GB DDR3, SSD; MBP, 2.6GHz Core i7, 16GB DDR3, SSD; Eizo fs2333
derbothaus is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 24, 2012, 07:11 PM   #9
rezwits
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Las Vegas
Send a message via ICQ to rezwits Send a message via AIM to rezwits Send a message via MSN to rezwits Send a message via Yahoo to rezwits Send a message via Skype™ to rezwits
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeicaM8 View Post
Uhm...
I'd say that What matters, if these drives are going to be your archive drives, is that the drives be of a high grade and a more reliable design. As in: what's the use of the cheaper Blue drives having faster throughput than the Blacks if the Blues are designed and manufactured in such a way that makes them likelier to fail sooner than the Blacks. Save 20-30 bucks &/or gain some efficiencies in the near term, but at cost of putting your data at risk &/or the fuss and bother of rescuing it or rebuilding it. Trust me, avoid the latter at all costs. I'm hip deep in sorting out a problem just one more good hard drive around would have prevented.
That's my thoughts anyway,
Your Mileage May Vary,
Not Valid In California,
LSMFT.

Richard in Michigan
WHat he said - THanks
rezwits is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > Mac Pro

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Does it make sense.....4S? AztecKing iPhone Tips, Help and Troubleshooting 8 Feb 1, 2014 12:38 AM
Can anyone make sense of this for me? dbmontana OS X 5 Dec 17, 2013 11:24 AM
Changes that may not make sense to you moonman239 iOS 7 9 Sep 24, 2013 04:02 AM
Does this make sense? mattxi Windows, Linux & Others on the Mac 1 Apr 9, 2013 01:19 AM
Wouldnt it make more sense for them to make the screen wider as well? krashx7 iPhone 58 Jul 10, 2012 07:52 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:14 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC