Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Low rpm vs high rpm

Tags:
  • Hard Drives
  • Storage
  • Product
Last response: in Storage
Share
November 26, 2010 2:15:42 PM

Someone told me a HDD with 5400 rpm is actually better than one 7200 rpm for 3 reasons :

#Reliable : 5400 rpm is more reliable than 7200 rpm when it comes to high density HDD. In my opinion this might be true because the slower it reads data the more reliable information it received.

#Durable : The more you use it, the faster it age. In this case it age 1/3 times faster. I dont know exact the average time a HDD spins before it dies. But the faster it spin, the faster it wear off. So its in my opinion quite logical that it would live shorter than one with lower rpm.

#Performance : You wont be able to notice the smal different in speed or performance. Perhaps 8~10% faster according to some topic ? And the price between 2TB 5400 rpm vs 2TB 7200 rpm is almost double.

Both got same capacity, 2TB.

Can anyone confirm if these statements are true or not ? Thanks.

More about : low rpm high rpm

a c 415 G Storage
November 26, 2010 5:15:43 PM

5400RPM drives generate less heat, and that can lead to longer life - but only if you compare it to a 7200RPM drive that doesn't have adequate cooling.

All of the WD "Green" drives I've seen have 1 in 10^15 read error specs (good), while many of the black drives seem to have only 1 in 10^14 (not as good).

The difference in performance isn't a big problem for data files, but for the OS it will be more noticeable.
November 26, 2010 9:29:24 PM

I dont think I need to worry about the heat probleem. As it wont be much of a different.

I just thought that if you use somethings more often it will die faster.
The drive's life depend on how often it spins right? And if it spin faster then ofc it dies faster.
Related resources
a b G Storage
November 26, 2010 11:05:02 PM

Since there are other ways to gain disk reliability (backup, raid, etc), there's very little reason to choose a turtle slow disk vs a faster disk for some small theoretical improvement in useful life.

You have to back up the data anyhow . . . this is not a factor on which to base HD choice.

OTOH, where the number of accesses is small and/or their is no need for speed, why not go 5400rpm? Saves money as well.

This was the point of malmental's first two sentences.
April 11, 2012 11:38:29 PM

GoDxNero said:
Someone told me a HDD with 5400 rpm is actually better than one 7200 rpm for 3 reasons :

#Reliable : 5400 rpm is more reliable than 7200 rpm when it comes to high density HDD. In my opinion this might be true because the slower it reads data the more reliable information it received.

#Durable : The more you use it, the faster it age. In this case it age 1/3 times faster. I dont know exact the average time a HDD spins before it dies. But the faster it spin, the faster it wear off. So its in my opinion quite logical that it would live shorter than one with lower rpm.

#Performance : You wont be able to notice the smal different in speed or performance. Perhaps 8~10% faster according to some topic ? And the price between 2TB 5400 rpm vs 2TB 7200 rpm is almost double.

Both got same capacity, 2TB.

Can anyone confirm if these statements are true or not ? Thanks.


Being a Musician....52 is just a little too slow!...more like a "Turtle" compared to a Rabbit!

Cowboy~
!