Hey guys, need someone who might have experience with the drives mentioned here or at least some input on how to interpret the data I found.
I was shopping for a 1tb drive and was about to go by default to the 1tb WD Caviar Black model with 64mb cache. I then saw the Caviar Blue 1tb model last released also has 64mb cache. I thought I'd check into their benchmark speed prior to buying.... and was shocked. According to Passmark's average of hundreds of samples submitted, the Blue is the fastest 1tb HDD currently being sold with a score over 1100. The Black is in the low 800's. The prior gen Blue which had 32mb cache was around 750.
Given the Black is probably still a better bet for dependability and quality control, but is it possible that the Blue will really perform at a higher level in real life situations? I've tested dozens of computers with the passmark program- not to expect the results would represent the actual performance in non-synthetic sitautions, but just to help spotting bottlenecks and such. I know that 300 points is a LOT of distance between two drives using their metrics....
Yeah, I'm torn on what to do here. The price difference is only $12 between the blue and black versions, and it is just for storage- but that also means that sequential transfer rate is more important than random access speed, which is the performance ability that Passmark really doesn't weigh heavily enough for evaluation of system drives. That said, I'll still probably play it safe and go with the model that WD feels good about backing for five years instead of two.
I don't understand how the WD10EZEX is able to achieve its PassMark score. According to the following HD Tune benchmarks, it has the slowest access time, and its sustained transfer rate is far less than Seagate's 1TB HDD.