Western Digital or Seagate?

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by strausd, Aug 1, 2010.

  1. strausd macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #1
    So I will be ordering a new Mac Pro in a few days and want to have everything planned out before I do so. I will have an SSD as my boot drive and want to store everything else on a software RAID 0 array of two 1.5 TB drives.

    Now I realize I could spend just a little bit more to get two 2TB, but I really don't want to have to spend the extra money. Two 1.5TB making a 3TB RAID 0 would be ideal.

    So right now I have found two main options. Western Digital Caviar Green 1.5 TB and Seagate Barracuda 1.5 TB. First off, I know the CG will spin at a slower rate, but two of them in a RAID 0 config would still make it faster than even a velociraptor. I have heard that some people have had problems with these drives in certain RAID configurations, is RAID 0 one of them? Also, does anyone have any experience with this specific drive?

    As for the Seagate, they spin at 7200 RPMs, so it would be a little faster than the CG. However, I have heard many people encountering problems with this drive. Some say it is the 1.5 TB capacity which is causing the problems, but personally I do not know. Also, I heard that there is a specific firmware you need to get for these drives to work, is that correct? If so, would updating the firmware under OS X be a problem? And do these drives have problems under RAID as well?

    Considering having two drives under a RAID 0 config will boost speed, I am not too worried about the rotational speed difference between the drives, my main concern is reliability. And yes, I will be backing all my data up daily.

    I already know my options for 1TB and 2TB, so please, all I want to know is which of these two drives would be best for a software RAID 0.

    Thanks in advance for the help
     
  2. snouter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 26, 2009
    #2
    Don't hold me to this. but I'm not sure you can use the Green models in a RAID.

    In general, I think the WD drives have a better rep right now and there are frequently good sales on hard drive if you just watch for them.

    Some of the Seagates spin at 5900 rpm, and they are the cheaper priced ones.

    That said, I have all my stuff backed up, and have been buying the Seagate drives since I have been finding good sales on them. I've had no issues, yet.
     
  3. johnnymg macrumors 65816

    johnnymg

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    #3
    You should also consider the Caviar Black. It's mucho faster than the green and only slightly more expensive:
    http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1077/1/
    Edit: This comparison article is for the 2T drives. Also, it looks like the 1.5T Black is no longer available. ??? Probably have to go 1T or 2T now if you go with the C B drives.

    BTW, who are you getting the RAM from?

    I'm going to order a base Quad or possibly the 3.3GHz Quad................ just waiting to see final pricing. If the 3.3 is at or under $3K then it will be the choice. I HIGHLY suspect the hex will be crazy-priced. As much as I want to see Apple make $'s (hold lots of aapl's), I'm a little chagrined about their pricing policy. :p

    cheers
    JohnG
     
  4. cluthz macrumors 68040

    cluthz

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2004
    Location:
    Norway
    #4
    If you store OS+ apps on the SSD, I wouldn't get a raid.
    Raid 0 is not hassle free, if you get errors on one drive, all your files will go bogus. Get a fast 1-2TB 7200 rpm drive for scratch and a 5400rpm for storage.
    I just bought two samsung 5400rpm 1.5TB drives for storage, they use little power and are really quiet. They were also a bit cheaper than the 5900rpm Segates and the WB green.
     
  5. strausd thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #5
    I saw the 1.5TB Caviar Black on newegg but they are currently sold out. I asked them if they knew when they would be back in stock and they had no idea.

    I will be getting my RAM from OWC.

    I do 3D animation and some film work and want things to load faster, not just the opening of an application. I am pretty much set on a RAID 0 config and just want to know which of the two drives would be best.
     
  6. snouter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 26, 2009
    #6
    i just got a 2tb Seagate 5900rpm for $119 at Microcenter.

    I would keep a look out for sales and keep in mind that you will probably want some sort of backup strategy.
     
  7. strausd thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #7
    I definitely plan on backing up very often, especially since if one drive fails, I lose all info from both drives.
     
  8. lemonade-maker macrumors 6502

    lemonade-maker

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    #8
    I've used 4 x 1.5Tb Seagate in raid 0, 1x1.5 seagate a timemachine and 1x1.5 seagate as nightly clone since march 2009 powered on 24-7 and not one problem.
     
  9. strausd thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #9
    How long have you had them? And are they the 7200 rpms or 5900? Also, do they have the new firmware on them?
     
  10. beto2k7 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2010
    Location:
    ::1
    #10
    I just got two sweet hitachi desktar 7200 2TB running nicely as a mirrored raid. I know hitachi is not one of the options... but I thought I'd gave my opinion. Those run at 7200 rpm... No noise at all
     
  11. johnnymg macrumors 65816

    johnnymg

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    #11
    Cool ~~~~~~ What Editing suit do you use?

    I'm contemplating using my C300 Crucial SSD (from my MBP) as the boot drive, a single 500GB HD for scratch, and then a couple of 2 GB Caviar Blacks in RAID 0 for data. That would nicely populate the 4 bays. :). Even the 2G Blacks are pretty reasonable compared to the cost of the freakin base Quad and some extra RAM. :p

    cheers
    JohnG
     
  12. strausd thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #12
    I hope you mean 2TB instead of 2GB ;)

    Right now I have to work on a 2009 MBP at 3.06. I'm using CS5 Master Collection, Maya 2011, Zbrush 3.12 on OS X, 3.5 on Win 7, and will soon start up some stuff on Final Cut. Most video stuff I do right now is on AE and I'm anxious to get my 12-core system soon and start to crazy stuff on it.

    I plan on having two 2tb Caviar Greens for backup and want to put the two 1.5TBs in bays 1 and 2 for scratch on RAID 0. I have thought about two 2TB Blacks, but then with the SSD and two 2TB, I would be backing up a total of up to 4.12TB to 4TB, and that just seems a little weird for me. Especially since I know I will accidentally delete stuff and those files will be backed up, making the backup drives fill up faster than the RAID 0 config.

    I still am not sure what to do, I am leaning towards two 1.5TB Caviar Green, considering that in a RAID 0, it would make the combined rotational speed anywhere from 10800-14400 RPMs. And I have heard that it generally stays around 5900 RPMs, meaning it will be mostly a combined RPM of 11800 RPMs, still much faster than a velociraptor, and at 3TB! Also, they won't provide near as much heat as a velociraptor and from what I have heard, will be a little more reliable. However, if one drive fails, I lose all the data. Which is why I want my total backup capacity to excede my scratch capacity.
     
  13. 300D macrumors 65816

    300D

    Joined:
    May 2, 2009
    Location:
    Tulsa
  14. snouter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 26, 2009
    #14
    I'd just get two 7200rpm drives. If you are going to go through the trouble of RAID, might as well.

    Plus, I think is this why you don't want to use the Green in RAID. They may not spin at the same speed.

    http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=624&pgno=8
     
  15. snouter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 26, 2009
    #15
    Convincing.
     
  16. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #16
    2x WB Caviler Blacks. good performance all round.

    i have some Hitachi's in RAID1 - they give good performance good (quiet as well)
     
  17. strausd thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #17
    Ya, I know the spindle speed, but together it will still be pretty fast. And would the different RPMs cause anything bad to happen in the RAID itself? Or would it just be that it might be a little slower at time (but still over 10000 RPMs)?
     
  18. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #18
    while is certainly isnt recommended, it wont completely hurt it - you will just have a bit more added latency on 1 drive. could cause a lot of problems though.
     
  19. brentsg macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    #19
    Don't put any manufacturer's "green" drives in a RAID 0.

    If you are set on RAID 0 make sure to buy their higher performance 7200RPM (or better) drives. They use all sorts of tricks to lower the power consumption and few of those tricks pay well with RAID arrays.

    Then again, I'm another person who's been there, done that.. and feels that RAID 0 isn't worth the bother.
     
  20. snouter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 26, 2009
    #20
    There is a chance that the two drives will not be the same speed. What I read is that at the factory WD sets the spindle speed for each drive to minimize noise and vibration per each drive.

    One drive could be 5700rpm and the other could be 6100rpm. I would not think that would be ideal.

    I do admit I don't fully understand the issue, and that I've just always heard that the Green drives were not ideal for use in RAID.
     
  21. brentsg macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    #21
    I don't even understand the fundamental concept.

    You are so worried about file transfer performance that you're going to use RAID 0. But then you want to build the RAID array from energy efficient, yet slow hard drives.
     
  22. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #22
    i thought i recall seeing "5400rpm" stated on their website?

    but yes, there is a lot of hidden secrets to how these drives work.

    my inquiry is - how do they make the drives so cheap if they check the optimal noise level for each drive! :eek:

    if each is variable, you would get SUCH a variety of speeds :( pretty bad.
     
  23. johnnymg macrumors 65816

    johnnymg

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    #23
    That sounds like sage advice. I've also had a Windows RAID 0 crash and it wasn't a pretty scene.

    I'd like to hear why a single Caviar Black 2 TB drive would be an 'issue' for a data drive. ???

    Anyone have feedback on how reliable a MP SW RAID 0 configuration would be?

    cheers
    JohnG
     
  24. strausd thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #24
    They aren't that much slower than 7200 RPM drives, and together in a RAID 0 would still be faster than a velociraptor.

    Does anyone have any experience with these in a RAID 0? What would the different spindle speeds cause in a RAID 0?
     
  25. DoFoT9 macrumors P6

    DoFoT9

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Location:
    Singapore
    #25
    this is for a software RAID isnt it?
     

Share This Page