Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

reliability hit going from 3.5" to 2.5" drive? WD Black in desktop computer running 24/7

Tags:
  • Western Digital
  • Desktops
  • Storage
  • Computers
Last response: in Storage
Share
a b G Storage
November 22, 2013 12:14:44 PM

so, I'm 99.98% sure I'm going to pick up a small-capacity WD Black to put my OS on since my SSD is driving me up the flippin' wall with the amount of crashes, BSODs, and lack of just being able to "plow through imperfect NANDs". I get anywhere from 30min to 4days of uptime before a freeze, and that's just plain-ol' unacceptable.

I've noticed that my local store has WD Blacks in a few variants - for example 500G 3.5" and 750G 2.5" (and I think they're all the same current generation).

how large of a reliability / durability difference would there be (IN A DESKTOP COMPUTER) if I were to buy a 2.5" instead of a 3.5" drive?

if I have a choice between a 2.5" 750G for $70, and a 3.5" 500G for $80, which is "preferable"?

this would only hold Win7x64, standard home/office apps, no gaming, needs to run 24/7. I have apps that run non-stop so I can't afford to have a crash or shut-down/reboot cycle every 2-3 days. my media (movies, music, pics) are on separate WD Reds.

I'd PREFER a 2.5" simply because it's smaller and easier to find a spot for it in the machine, but I'm open to suggestions and learning new facts.

More about : reliability hit drive black desktop computer running

a c 951 G Storage
November 22, 2013 12:18:34 PM

Quote:
since my SSD is driving me up the flippin' wall with the amount of crashes, BSODs, and lack of just being able to "plow through imperfect NANDs". I get anywhere from 30min to 4days of uptime before a freeze, and that's just plain-ol' unacceptable.


That should not be happening. Period.
How old is it? Maybe an RMA is in order.

As far as 2.5" v 3.5" reliability? Should be no real difference.
m
0
l
a b G Storage
November 22, 2013 12:34:05 PM

the current SSD is about 3 weeks old (yes, VERY new!!), an ADATA SX900 128G. yes, it'll get RMAd and i'll expect a replacement, but I had similar issues 2-3 years ago with a Corsair Force3 60G (which also got RMAd, replaced, and the replacement is in some other machine that gets rebooted daily so I don't care about it)

at this stage, I don't trust SSD no matter how zippy-fast they are, since an old old Hitachi 100G HDD ran my system flawlessly until it had to be reallocated to a laptop that needed a 2.5" drive.
m
0
l
a c 951 G Storage
November 22, 2013 12:40:49 PM

giantbucket said:
the current SSD is about 3 weeks old (yes, VERY new!!), an ADATA SX900 128G. yes, it'll get RMAd and i'll expect a replacement, but I had similar issues 2-3 years ago with a Corsair Force3 60G (which also got RMAd, replaced, and the replacement is in some other machine that gets rebooted daily so I don't care about it)

at this stage, I don't trust SSD no matter how zippy-fast they are, since an old old Hitachi 100G HDD ran my system flawlessly until it had to be reallocated to a laptop that needed a 2.5" drive.


Well..of the two SSD's (Kingston and Sandisk) in my main machine, I've had exactly zero SSD related issues since installing a year ago.
m
0
l

Best solution

a c 110 G Storage
November 22, 2013 1:15:38 PM

I still have a 3 year old OCZ Vertex 2 120GB in my main computer and have had 0 issues. I am about to replace it with a 500GB Samsung 840 Evo if I can find one on sale here during the holidays but only because I want more room.

2.5in laptop drives at that price will be 5400rpm or 5900rpm and slower than 7200rpm desktop 3.5in drives in the same price range.

RMA the SSD and use that. You will be much happier in the long run.
Share
a b G Storage
November 22, 2013 1:36:53 PM

well, my OS only actually needs around 45G to live, and surprisingly the 2.5" WD Blacks (which are available here for $70 for either the 500G or 750G capacity) are the 7200rpm stuff. I'm just wondering if / hoping that they'll be reliable and can run 24/7 like I need them to run. I checked the WD site and from their specs (so not real-life feedback from users), the 2.5" versions are actually rated for 600k load/unload cycles whereas the 3.5" are rated for only 300k cycles - and the 2.5" are also rated for higher shock (as they ought to be).

on the SSD, maybe ADATA stuff just isn't that great so even when I DO send it back under warranty, I'm going to get back another ADATA - they're not gonna send me an Intel or Samsung SSD as a replacement! :p 

plus there's downtime - even if RMA process is as fast as a week, that's a solid week during which I can't do what I need to do. :/ 

(ya know, for the money I spent on the SSD I could have had a small Black, with change for a decent lunch)
m
0
l
a c 970 G Storage
November 22, 2013 3:49:08 PM

my 2.5" WD blue 160GB that was in a previous laptop for a couple of years has been running my home server for over 4 yrs now without issue. As you know performance isn't an requirement for the OS drive

I'd get the cheaper of the two - so 2.5" 750gb wins.
m
0
l
a b G Storage
November 25, 2013 12:57:11 PM

so yeah, update for those who care... I picked up the 2.5" WD Black 750G, (re)installed my Win7 on a 128G partition and kept the rest as a scratch partition (which ties in with some other thread I had on here). for $70, I think I'm happy. and the little Black is surprisingly quiet!

next step is to send that ADATA SSD in for replacement under warranty - and use whatever they give me back as a........ doorstop?
m
0
l
a c 110 G Storage
November 25, 2013 1:05:19 PM

You could always sell it if you don't need it and at least get some money back for your trouble.
m
0
l
!