Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Western Digital Updates "Black" Line of HDDs

Last response: in News comments
Share
a c 107 G Storage
October 14, 2013 7:07:48 PM

Assuming prices don't jump crazily that is a nice little performance boost.
Score
9
a b G Storage
October 14, 2013 7:19:34 PM

500MB? What is this 1990?
Score
21
Related resources
a c 80 G Storage
October 14, 2013 7:23:17 PM

I was just about to say the same thing Patrick...I was like...ummm 500MB...What are these? Pin size flash drive? lol
Score
-3
a b G Storage
October 14, 2013 7:28:23 PM

The source article, at X-bit labs, says 500GB.
Score
1
a b G Storage
October 14, 2013 7:30:07 PM

I personally like this one:

Quote:
The updated HDDs promise higher performance of up to 48 percent, better accuracy, stronger reliability and a greater efficiency.


"Higher performance of up to 48 percent," 48 percent... greater blackness?

Your commas missed. :p 
Score
0
October 14, 2013 7:31:45 PM

It appears that no one reviews the article prior to posting it.

Thanks DaUnreal, I think we're all pretty aware that it was a typo. :) 
Score
0
October 14, 2013 7:33:37 PM

its a typo.. its meant to say 500GB
Score
-2
October 14, 2013 8:37:46 PM

I could see once.. but four times? 500 MB?
Score
3
October 14, 2013 10:07:43 PM

Another thing to note, I wonder if they will sneak in updates for the Velociraptor. I was planning to get one of those soon, but the Black updates put it pretty close now in the sequential reads.
Score
0
October 14, 2013 10:46:26 PM

1TB platters?
Score
0
a b G Storage
October 14, 2013 11:11:13 PM

@yannigr 500MB platters.

huehuehue
Score
0
October 14, 2013 11:45:45 PM

Sorry but no WD Caviar Blacks for me after using Intel SSDs. I last bought a Black (2TB) in early 2011. With a SSD as a system drive, I can easily use Seagate 3TB/4TB as storage drives. As I see it, Seagate 4TB is $165-170 compared with $260-270 for WD 4 TB Black. Even the slower WD Red 4TB is for $200. Ok, so WD has a 5 year warranty for blacks but they have started sending out refurbished drives now as replacement. That USP also goes. Till 2011, they used to send new ones for Black RMA.
Score
-5
October 14, 2013 11:52:14 PM

I'd really like to see a review of these updated drives.
Score
2
October 15, 2013 12:20:06 AM

yannigr said:
1TB platters?


From what I've read elsewhere these still use the same 800GB platters. The biggest difference is that the drive capacities below 3TB appear to have been updated with the 800GB platters, where as before they were still using prior gen 500GB platters. Also, it looks like the new 3TB drive may have been reduced to 4 platters, where as the older drive was physically identical to the 4TB version and used 5 platters.
Score
0
October 15, 2013 1:12:00 AM

Believe it or not, but recently I used CrystalDisck to check my hard drives health. I have a Samsung HD501LJ that has 34,874 hours on it which is 1,453 days that's 4 years!! I think that's incredible for RPM hard drive made back in 2006.
Score
-2
October 15, 2013 1:13:15 AM

Not to confuse anyone, but that's is the total power on hours. Just like a car has miles on it.
Score
-2
October 15, 2013 2:13:25 AM

They silently upgraded the series and didn't call for more money?! WD changed alot.
Score
-1
October 15, 2013 3:56:46 AM


x2ruff4u, I have SCSI disks that are still running after more than 20 years. :D 

Ian.

Score
2
October 15, 2013 6:30:57 AM

Can anyone please explain this:
Quote:
... increasing the accuracy of the data written...

This isn't the age of analog dubbing and mix tapes. Either the data was written with 100% accuracy... or it wasn't. And I thought the bit-error rate on these things was supposed to be something on the order of 1 : 10^14 (plus or minus a couple of exponent points). So did they bump up that exponent, or what am I missing?
Score
-2
October 15, 2013 6:43:48 AM

Mechanical Drives are really just long term storage devices now imo. The bulk of research should go into improving the cost/gigabyte, speed and reliability of SSD drives.
Score
-2
a b G Storage
October 15, 2013 8:07:36 AM

acyuta said:
Sorry but no WD Caviar Blacks for me after using Intel SSDs. I last bought a Black (2TB) in early 2011. With a SSD as a system drive, I can easily use Seagate 3TB/4TB as storage drives. As I see it, Seagate 4TB is $165-170 compared with $260-270 for WD 4 TB Black. Even the slower WD Red 4TB is for $200. Ok, so WD has a 5 year warranty for blacks but they have started sending out refurbished drives now as replacement. That USP also goes. Till 2011, they used to send new ones for Black RMA.


I kind of agree. Not so much that SSDs are going to be replacing 2TB+ HDDs any time soon (give it a few more years), but that Seagate has much better offerings at much lower prices.

The real issue with WD today is that you have their Blue series which is reliable but expensive, and cannot be used in a RAID. Then you have the Black series which is crazy expensive for what it is, but they are reliable, performant, and RAID-able. And then you have a slew of drives in the Green, Red, AV-GP, and 'mainstream' series which are all glorified trash, and even though they are more affordable, they still manage to be $10-20 more expensive than others.

Now I am not saying that Seagate is perfect either. They too have issues with their low-tier drives. The difference is that you can get a mid to high level Seagate drive without issues and still save some $30-100 per drive compared to a similarly performing WD Blue or Black. You typically don't get as long of a warranty with them (3-5 years vs 5-7 years), but it is often an issue of a longer warranty you need vs a shorter warranty that you are much likely to need. Personally I would rather the latter rather than the former.
Score
-2
October 15, 2013 3:50:53 PM

Does it have the piezeoelectric wrist like the 2TB last generation Caviar Black?

Average acces times of 11.8ms like the older Caviar black? How is the real world performance improved over the last generation besides high sustained transfer rates? It does mention better performance/reliability in vibration environments, a dual core processor was in the previous Caviar Black as well.

So higher STR, does that mean 1TB platter now instead of 800GB?
Score
1
October 15, 2013 4:06:08 PM

danwat1234 said:
Does it have the piezeoelectric wrist like the 2TB last generation Caviar Black?

Average acces times of 11.8ms like the older Caviar black? How is the real world performance improved over the last generation besides high sustained transfer rates? It does mention better performance/reliability in vibration environments, a dual core processor was in the previous Caviar Black as well.

So higher STR, does that mean 1TB platter now instead of 800GB?


No, they still use 800GB platters. The higher sequential transfer rates on the new 4 and 3TB drives stems primarily from "improved algorithms and an updated controller with 'double the bits' of its predecessor. According to WD, the 'high resolution controller' improves tracking precision, which in turn accelerates overall performance".

In addition to these controller improvements, the 2 and 1TB drives likely got a platter density update. The FAEX version of these drives were still based on 500GB platters. I'm assuming this update brings them up to 800GB platters like the higher capacity drives in the lineup.
Score
1
October 15, 2013 4:08:15 PM

Stronger reliability - So they're upping our warranty to 5yrs again then right? No? At least 3yrs? No?....So they aren't any more reliable than they were before? Oh so then you really just removed warranty before to screw us...I got it...thanks. Just what I thought.
Score
-2
October 15, 2013 4:14:45 PM

somebodyspecial said:
Stronger reliability - So they're upping our warranty to 5yrs again then right? No? At least 3yrs? No?....So they aren't any more reliable than they were before? Oh so then you really just removed warranty before to screw us...I got it...thanks. Just what I thought.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. As far as I know WD's Black lineup has always had a 5yr warranty, including their prior FAEX drives. At least according to their official documentation.
Score
1
October 15, 2013 5:36:03 PM

I seriously must have a brain tumor... ;(
Score
-1
October 15, 2013 5:38:04 PM

Ugh I seriously must have a brain tumor... sorry for the confusing typo!
Score
-1
October 15, 2013 5:40:02 PM

... and the double comment...
Score
-1
October 17, 2013 6:31:27 AM

Like dragonsqrrl, I'm keen on reviews for these disks :)  Tom's has perhaps the best storage tests and review I know, so I'm really looking forward to the reviews on these :D 
Score
1
October 22, 2013 2:00:01 PM

You couldnt give me a Seagate. I have had horrible luck with them. I have at least a dozen $160 bricks. I think WD blacks are very durable for the price. Pretty speedy also. Of course we have all gotten aDOA here and there. Out of a few dozen i have purchased i have had 2 DAO's with 1 giving out after about 2 months. I think that was a user abuse problem though.
Score
1
November 2, 2013 7:33:38 PM

@patrick47018 If memory serves, in 1990 a 500MB drive would've been HUGE. I'm not sure any desktop PC would've had such a big drive then. 40MB or 80MB were the usual as I recall.
Score
0
November 4, 2013 4:14:35 PM

PCfan12 said:
@patrick47018 If memory serves, in 1990 a 500MB drive would've been HUGE. ...


I have some fairly large drives from back then. One of them is indeed
dated May 1990, a 200MB SCSI, weighs 7 lbs 12.5 oz (3.5kg), just
under 9" long, 5.25" wide, about 3" high. I use it as a doorstop. :D 
It was originally in an SGI Crimson IIRC.

Ian.

Score
0
!