Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Seagate 7200.12 vs WDC Caviar Black

Last response: in Storage
Share
October 17, 2009 6:44:05 PM

Whats a better buy (better price/performance ratio), the seagate 7200.12 for $80 or the wdc caviar black for $100? both are 1 terabytes...

Seagate: http://www.seagate.com/www/en-us/products/desktops/barr...
WDC : http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.asp?driveid=488
a b G Storage
October 17, 2009 9:05:40 PM

Honestly, both are good, but the Seagate should be a bit quieter, cooler, lower power, and faster. The difference isn't huge though.
m
0
l
Related resources
October 18, 2009 2:17:09 AM

uhm, so the seagate is faster.. so, why is the black more expensive?
m
0
l
a b G Storage
October 18, 2009 3:03:45 AM

Because the black is using 3 platters, while the seagate is using 2. This makes the seagate both faster and cheaper to produce.
m
0
l
October 18, 2009 3:53:17 AM

Seagate's 7200.12 with 500GB platters (check the capacity!) has the highest throughput with measured 334MB/s, but WD's arm is more agile.

Did I see an agile disk at WD with 500GB per platter?

Also, measured noise is some 10dB higher at WD... Which doesn't tell much about perceived noise.
m
0
l
October 18, 2009 6:43:50 AM

Pointertovoid said:
Seagate's 7200.12 with 500GB platters (check the capacity!) has the highest throughput with measured 334MB/s, but WD's arm is more agile.

Did I see an agile disk at WD with 500GB per platter?

Also, measured noise is some 10dB higher at WD... Which doesn't tell much about perceived noise.



what do you mean with more agile?
m
0
l
October 18, 2009 12:34:04 PM

i would go for the caviar black, cause the seagate has a very slow accestime (15-16ms), the WD has a acces time of 12ms.
personally i would go for the samsung sping point F3, which is around 80 bucks and has a accestime of 13ms and also had 500gb/platter
so you get both the advantage of seagate and WD for for a very nice price!!
m
0
l
October 18, 2009 1:14:58 PM

does 3ms make a difference?
m
0
l
October 19, 2009 12:34:31 AM

seagate 7200.11 was believed to have firmware issues but both my 7200.11 1TB are alive and kicking for a year now. Even then, I didn't find it justfiable to purchase the cavier black over something that's significantly cheaper (20 dollars is still a lot to a student like me). Now that seagate fixed their firmware issues. i see no reason what so ever to buy the WD.

edit: oh ya perhaps WD might have a longer warranty but don't quote me on that. (still not worth it IMHO)
m
0
l
October 19, 2009 12:57:43 PM

Quote:

does 3ms make a difference?

depands on where you use the hdd for
for just storage: NO but as OS hdd: yes

and besides, the samsung has the same price as seagate, and has also 500mb/platter so you get the same or even better throughput as seagate, but with faster acess time.
it's all win win, am I right?
m
0
l
a c 353 G Storage
October 19, 2009 4:15:18 PM

^ Good read, but dated as it shows the -11 Segate, not the -12 version.

I have the 2 WD 640s in Raid 0 and short stroke - happy with them. If I had more money to burn, I'd get the segate (Probably 750s as they have the 32 meg cache vs 16 meg for the 500s) And find out.

But alas need extra cache for that 2nd SSD
m
0
l
!