WD Caviar Black 1TB VS. Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 1 TB

[Mechagodzilla0]

Hi guys,

Looking at getting another HD to run win 7 back up my stuff while upgrading to win 7. Ive heard good things about both these drives. The seagate seems to be good as its more readily availbe where i am but i have heard rumors about the seagates having driver troubles.

Any input you gusy could give would be much appriecated

Cheers

 

[ctfgold]

Western Digital WD-10EARS is pretty good.


Link

 

[mi1ez]

Spinpoint F3 is, I believe, the fastest HDD at a decent price point and capacity.

 

[mi1ez]

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/charts/2009-3.5-desktop-hard-drive-charts/h2benchw-3.12-Avg-Write-Throughput,1013.html
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/charts/2009-3.5-desktop-hard-drive-charts/h2benchw-3.12-Avg-Read-Throughput,1010.html

 

[charmedforever]

I have face the same situation from week ago as i have to choose between seagate 7200.12 (1tb) and samsung 1.5TB (green)(5400 rpm) as the price difference between them was little.
and i have choose the seagate 7200.12 and after i try it i could tell you this drive is fast (averega transfer rate is ~100 and max 130 mb/s) and cool and have very low sound.

but i think from reading the reviews the WD black 1tb is faster than the seagate drive and i also i have read users reviews and i found that western digital black drive have more votes than the seagate 7200.12 drive.

 

[terr281]

Based upon personal knowledge gained from reviews 1-2 months old, including personal "bias":

1. Seagate Barracuda drives post 7200.11, still have occasional firmware issues.
2. Samsung Spinpoints are generally the highest capacity per dollar. However, they have a reputation for being lower quality than...
3. WD Caviar Black drives. Further, I do not know of any issues with WD Caviar Black drives except for the occasional bad drive... something all manufacturers face.

With that above said, on a company/drive model basis, I would go with a WD Caviar Black for "quality" or a Samsung Spinpoint for "quality at best cost." In my recent computer builds for clients/friends, I have used both types of drives... and haven't had any issues.

However, with 2 early attempts at the Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 drives, I will not purchase another. (My personal computers happily use 7200.11 series drives, as I used to prefer Seagate HDs.)

 

[DCBoy]

Further, I do not know of any issues with WD Caviar Black drives except for the occasional bad drive... something all manufacturers face.

Im also trying to decide between the two however i have heard that the WD Caviar Blk generates a lot of heat and is nosier than the Seagate Barracuda. This is a big deal for My purposes seeing as this drive will probably have to run 24/7 in a moderately popular room in my house.

Don't get me wrong I traditionally have used WD due to their pretty much universal OS compatibility. I have many systems running everything from Ubuntu to Chromium OS. including the standard Windows/Mac systems. and one thing they all seem to have in common is no matter what WD drive you use it is either supported native or someone else has created a (surprisingly easy to find) patch to make it supported. So I don't usually even check to see if the OS supports the particular WD drive i am using.


My current project however is a bit more complicated. I am building a Home Server running a moded version of the UNIX based Freebsd OS. And while doing research I discovered that patches are a lot harder to come by for this OS.

I was able to find patches WD Caviar and Seagate Barracuda drives as well as many more drives. But of the drives I found patches for the WD Caviar black, GP, Green as well as the Seagate Barracuda are for sale down the street from my house. so potentially I could pick them up tomorrow if I wanted.

and I don't think they'll run out. This store is notorious for having the worst PC upgrade components selection on the planet. So noone with any serious intent on upgrading their system would think to check there
_____________
DCBoy