All about Internal Storage
 Latest Internal Storage articles
All Internal Storage articles

Newsletters


  • Ask your question about IT issues
  • Post

Partners

The Games selection

violent : More Mindless Violence Basic shooting game, but still so powerful! Use the mouse to take aim and shoot at the little beasties before they get to you. Use Space to reload....
crazy : Interactive Boogy Pick one of the 3 songs, hit on the correct keys matching this boy's dance moves.
Ads

Sponsored links

Western Digital Caviar Green (WD15EADS)

Previous Next
2:00 AM - 06/24/2009 by Patrick Schmid and Achim Roos

We took a look at WD’s 2 TB Caviar Green drive when it was released; now it’s time to review the 1.5 TB version, which is technically very similar.

First of all, we’d like to point out that 32 MB cache memory is important in the case of Western Digital’s Caviar Green drives, as only the latest drive generation has been equipped with the increased buffer capacity. Seeing 16 MB cache means that it is a WD EACS-type Caviar Green drive, which does not offer the same power efficiency as the tested WD20EADS (2.0 TB) and WD15EADS (1.5 TB). As you’ll see in the benchmark section, the latest WD generation is much better than the previous one. All drives come with a SATA/300 interface and NCQ (Native Command Queuing).

WD’s product information Web site lists a plethora of marketing-heavy buzz words and technical specs, mostly mentioning low power consumption, reduced operating temperature, noise, and balanced performance. These are supposedly the result of the relatively low 5,400 RPM spindle speed (IntelliPower), dynamic search algorithms to optimize performance and power requirements during seek operations (IntelliSeek), and several other technologies.

A look at our benchmark results shows that the 1.5 TB Caviar Green is a nice performer: its 101.7 MB/s maximum throughput isn’t enough to beat Samsung’s EcoGreen F2 (at almost 107 MB/s), but the result is still respectable. However, WD manages to deliver much better average and minimum throughput numbers, as the Caviar Green stays above 70 MB/s, while Samsung’s EC F2 drops to roughly 50 MB/s, which is quite a difference. WD also dominates the I/O-intensive benchmarks and most of the PCMark Vantage HDD test sections.

Power consumption is a real issue for many users. In this test, the 1.5 TB WD drive is superior in idle power, but not when it comes to our three activity tests: streaming, I/O, and video playback. Yet WD’s drive is quieter in both tests.

Talkback
dragonfang18 06/24/2009 8:35 AM
Hide
-4+

Man Western Digital its on the ball for a while... Hope they keep it up.

StumpyStumped 06/24/2009 8:42 AM
Hide
-8+

I think power efficiency have gone way beyond practical. Take the 2TB WD drive running it at max for 24hr per day for 1 year. You get a total usage of 6.9 x 24 x 365 / 1000 = 63kW which converts to $9 electricity for 1 year. Comparing this to insane graphics card consumption for 300, 400, 500 even 1000W+ systems. I don't see why Tom's keep on telling us HDD are going green when it really matters little in the overall PC consumption.

Anonymous 06/24/2009 9:09 AM
Hide
-4+

When I read the title I was excited, after checking out the roundup I was a little bit disappointed. I'm missing the Seagate Barracuda LP drive, which is also available in 1.5TB. Why don't you guys put this drive in the roundup as well?

pirateboy 06/24/2009 9:32 AM
Hide
-1+

Tekn0z :
When I read the title I was excited, after checking out the roundup I was a little bit disappointed. I'm missing the Seagate Barracuda LP drive, which is also available in 1.5TB. Why don't you guys put this drive in the roundup as well?



+1
please update this article with scores of the new Seagate LP Drive.
thanks

sihastru 06/24/2009 10:19 AM
Hide
-0+

The images with the electrical boards are misplaced. It makes the Samsung look like a carefully assembled hard drive...

FSXFan 06/24/2009 10:32 AM
Hide
-0+

stumpystumped :
I think power efficiency have gone way beyond practical. Take the 2TB WD drive running it at max for 24hr per day for 1 year. You get a total usage of 6.9 x 24 x 365 / 1000 = 63kW which converts to $9 electricity for 1 year. Comparing this to insane graphics card consumption for 300, 400, 500 even 1000W+ systems. I don't see why Tom's keep on telling us HDD are going green when it really matters little in the overall PC consumption.


I was about to say the same thing. I have four HDD's running in my PC all the time but I know the power they use is negligible compared to my OC'ed quad and HD3870, especially when I run Folding@Home around 18hrs a day.

sihastru 06/24/2009 10:36 AM
Hide
-0+

The only reason for buying a "Green" hard drive is not lower power consumption. I mean... It's not much of a difference. It is a very large percentage, but a very small number.

So you're not going to save the Planet with Green drives, unless you buy them by the hundreds for big farms. I think they should sell regular drives as Green ones, and when someone purchases one, they should plant a few trees somewhere on the Planet in their name...

For me, the only good reason for buying a Green drive would be to use it for storage because the 5400 RPM should translate into better reliability (but that's not proven yet).

2shea 06/24/2009 2:24 PM
Hide
-2+

the best good points of these hdd's are that they are reasonably cool, low power requirement for htpc's with a small psu and reasonably quiet. That makes them very good in the htpc market and that is where they are best for.
Yes you can use them in your regular pc as well off course but that is not the main market. I think the seagate wasn't available at the moment they started testing the disks and that is why it is not included, or they didn't got one from seagate on time.

AdamB5000 06/24/2009 4:48 PM
Hide
-0+

I'm all for efficiency, but I hope people don't think that getting a "green" hard drive and saving three watts is going to "save the planet."

eaclou 06/24/2009 5:22 PM
Hide
-0+

Tom's, thanks for doing an article with some power/temp/noise statistics -- it's great to see those numbers, when they are usually glossed over or ignored.

Now if we could just get some stats on Video Cards, or get the graphics manufacturers to produce even just 1 model of a smaller, cooler, quieter card rather than the ever-bigger, insanely hot ones.

-and to the people who said these drives won't make a difference. Yes, taken alone they won't, but that's the same with pretty much everything. The point is, it's good to see the direction of innovation headed in the low-power/temp direction, as it WILL make a difference when everyone is using the more efficient parts, which will likely last longer because they don't run at >60C. No, 3W isn't huge, but it's EASY, and with not a terrible performance loss, i think these "green" drives are great.

pirateboy 06/24/2009 7:11 PM
Hide
-1+

eaclou :
...Now if we could just get some stats on Video Cards, or get the graphics manufacturers to produce even just 1 model of a smaller, cooler, quieter card rather than the ever-bigger, insanely hot ones...



here you go:
Albatron HD 4830 Green 512 MB
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews [...] 4830_Green

storageinventor 06/24/2009 10:08 PM
Hide
-0+

Saving a couple of watts on a hard drive may not seem like much, until you realize that the industry sells something like 500 million units each year. If you figure an average life expectancy of about 3 years for a hard drive, that would mean that there are probably over 2 billion hard drives currently in use. Now if each hard drive uses a few less watts, the overall electrical use can really be significant.

the_garynator 06/24/2009 11:48 PM
Hide
-0+

I really want to see a review on the reliability of these 1.5TB hard drives...seems to me they all have HORRIBLE ratings at newegg...something like 25%+/- 1 star ratings and 50%+/- 5 star ratings which is horrible considering that most other hard drives are somewhere around 75%+/- 5 star ratings and 10%+/- 1 star ratings.

computabug 06/25/2009 1:06 AM
Hide
-0+

The amount of energy taken for all of Tom's readers to DL this article greatly dwarfs the energy saved by using eco drives of low performance that save you around ten bucks over their life span and initially cost you a lot more than regular drives of the same performance.

Cletus_slackjawd 06/25/2009 4:18 AM
Hide
-0+

the_garynator :
I really want to see a review on the reliability of these 1.5TB hard drives...seems to me they all have HORRIBLE ratings at newegg...something like 25%+/- 1 star ratings and 50%+/- 5 star ratings which is horrible considering that most other hard drives are somewhere around 75%+/- 5 star ratings and 10%+/- 1 star ratings.


Sadly, this is too true. Sold my RMA drive to my brother, don't trust these drives. Lost 750GB of emulation software. If at all considering one of these drives, add the cost of a second drive to your purchase for backup or lose big time.

ProDigit80 06/25/2009 4:44 AM
Hide
--1+

perhaps it would be nice to see the power measurments on some notebook HD variants.
Power requirement most of the time means only something in the server and notebook sector.
The desktop sector can live perfectly fine with a HD that consumes 3Watts more than another one!

masterwhitman 06/25/2009 6:39 AM
Hide
-0+

Yes, please do an update to include the Seagate LP drives; it's hardly worth doing an article for only 2 drives, don't'cha think?

astrodudepsu 06/25/2009 7:25 AM
Hide
-0+

the_garynator :
I really want to see a review on the reliability of these 1.5TB hard drives...seems to me they all have HORRIBLE ratings at newegg...something like 25%+/- 1 star ratings and 50%+/- 5 star ratings which is horrible considering that most other hard drives are somewhere around 75%+/- 5 star ratings and 10%+/- 1 star ratings.




Normally, I don't trust NewEgg reviews at all but I have to agree with the above post. SOMETHING must be up for all these drives to get such low ratings. At first I was willing to chalk it up to the garbage 7200.11 1.5TB drives, but it's not just those bricks getting such poor ratings. And while newegg reviews are purely anecdotal, it does seem fishy.

Anonymous 06/25/2009 9:56 PM
Hide
-0+

Does anyone know where the Samsung drive can be purchased?

vherub 06/25/2009 11:45 PM
Hide
-0+

it's been a while since anyone called 1,500 MB mammoth


Sponsored links

Related articles

  • 1.5 TB Low-Power HDDs: Green Gets Big

    The latest 2 TB hard drives are still expensive, but 1.5 TB disks provide low power consumption at a better cost-to-capacity ratio. We look at offerings from Samsung and Western Digital to determine the value of taking a step down from flagship.

  • New Desktop Hard Drives: Speed Or Capacity?

    Today we're testing and dissecting Samsung’s Spinpoint F2, Seagate’s Barracuda 7200.12, and WD’s 2 TB Caviar Green. They all hold 500 GB of data per platter, but the similarities stop there. Which one works best for you?

  • WD Caviar GP: The "Green" 1 TB Drive

    Terabyte drives from Samsung and Seagate have been delayed, but WD just released a new 1,000 GB hard drive called the Caviar GP. It's no performance champion, but it's probably the most efficient desktop hard drive ever.