Skip to main content

Big HDD Showdown: Seagate 10TB vs. HGST Ultrastar He10 vs. WD Gold 8TB

128KB Sequential Read And Write

To read more on our test methodology visit How We Test Enterprise HDDs, which explains how to interpret our charts. We cover 128KB sequential performance measurements on page three, latency measurements on page five and power measurements on page six.

Sequential workload performance is one of the most important tests for nearline-class HDDs, because it can be indicative of large file transfers or RAID rebuild speed. We start the regimen by writing the entire surface of each drive from the beginning of the LBA range to the end, which represents a continuous stream of data that fills the entire drive. The performance steadily declines as the drive writes move from the edge of the platter (left) to the interior portions of the platter (right). The performance will decline until the workload returns to the outer edge of the platter, indicated by the large performance spike at the end of the test.

The Seagate 10TB writes the entire surface of its platters in approximately 14 hours, while the HGST He10 requires 30 min more to complete the same test. The WD Gold 8TB and the HGST He8 display different performance profiles, which is somewhat surprising because they are so similar during random workloads. The Seagate 8TB drive writes its full LBA range faster than the competing HDDs.

Image 1 of 9

Image 2 of 9

Image 3 of 9

Image 4 of 9

Image 5 of 9

Image 6 of 9

Image 7 of 9

Image 8 of 9

Image 9 of 9

The HGST He10 leads the pack during the 128K sequential write test, but it suffers another performance decline during the QD128 and QD256 sections of the test. In contrast, the Seagate continues to offer a steady level of performance under heavier loads. The Seagate 8TB is impressive with sequential write workloads; it handily beats the HGST and WD 8TB competitors.

The Seagate 10TB and 8TB provide the highest overall performance during the heavier portions of the workload, and we can observe the HGST's performance reduction under heavy load in the latency over IOPS and QoS test results. However, it provides a tangible advantage during light QD1 workloads.

The Seagate 10TB draws the least power, but if the SATA version of the He10 lives up to HGST's specifications, it would easily consume much less power during this workload. The SAS variant remains impressive, and even manages to beat the SATA Seagate 8TB by a large margin, and falls into the competitive range of the other 8TB helium models.

Image 1 of 7

Image 2 of 7

Image 3 of 7

Image 4 of 7

Image 5 of 7

Image 6 of 7

Image 7 of 7

The HGST He10 provides the best performance profile during the entirety of the workload, while the WD Gold and the He8 continue to provide nearly identical performance characteristics. The HGST He10 leads in nearly every metric during the measurement window, though the Seagate 10TB challenges it in the QD32 QoS breakout chart.

Image 1 of 3

Image 2 of 3

Image 3 of 3

Mixed sequential workloads are important for nearline-class drives because in many cases there will be simultaneous read and write requests with large sequential data. Most workloads will likely skew towards the read-centric side of the plot, such as 90/10 to 70/30 read/write mixtures. The HGST He10 delivers a much better performance profile than the competing devices in the read-centric portions of the test, and it also has less variability. The He10 also provides the best QoS profile during the test, which cements its overall leadership position with sequential data.

  • Bret_Schumacher
    You should have compared it to the 10TB gold which had "supposedly" higher read/write rates comparable to seagate and hgst
    Reply
  • PaulAlcorn
    18389500 said:
    You should have compared it to the 10TB gold which had "supposedly" higher read/write rates comparable to seagate and hgst

    I agree. The 10TB Gold was only announced two days ago. We inquired with WD, but samples are not ready yet.

    Reply
  • AndrewJacksonZA
    I know that your review uses the pricing that you have at hand, but as I'm reading the article, your ads are displaying prices as follows:
    HGST ULTRASTAR HE10 - $506 on Amazon
    SEAGATE ENTERPRISE CAPACITY 10TB - $589 on Amazon
    WD GOLD 8TB - $600 on Newegg

    The HE10 in the review is taken as the most expensive drive when it's actually the cheapest. Would you consider revising your pros and cons for each drive's cost?

    Thank you
    Reply
  • PaulAlcorn
    18389599 said:
    I know that your review uses the pricing that you have at hand, but as I'm reading the article, your ads are displaying prices as follows:
    HGST ULTRASTAR HE10 - $506 on Amazon
    SEAGATE ENTERPRISE CAPACITY 10TB - $589 on Amazon
    WD GOLD 8TB - $600 on Newegg

    The HE10 in the review is taken as the most expensive drive when it's actually the cheapest. Would you consider revising your pros and cons for each drive's cost?

    Thank you

    Prices fluctuate, and it varies between retailers. Usually we do not provide a graph with low, average, and high values, but I added it due to the big price variation between retailers. It isn't a perfect system, but retail pricing is our only resource.
    The $500 for the HGST He10 is noted in the 'low' category, but the drive is still retailing at CDW for $855.

    Reply
  • AndrewJacksonZA
    Thanks Paul! :-)
    Reply
  • spookyman
    No Seagate for me. Their drives are notoriously unreliable and always fail on us.
    Reply
  • 3ogdy
    18389819 said:
    No Seagate for me. Their drives are notoriously unreliable and always fail on us.

    THERE.YOU.GO. Once again another one just like me...
    Seagate hard drives have proven to be extremely unreliable for me too. This company is an absolute nightmare. I have quite a few 7200.12 500GB and 7200.14 2TB Barracudas that simply stopped working. Some of them, in a very convenient way, right after the 2yr warranty - even though that doesn't cover data recovery, of course.

    Once my last 7200.14 2TB Barracuda went belly up...I had to cough up over $1000 to ship that POS to the Netherlands and have my data sent back to me on an external Seagate drive. VERY poor quality products from this company. I'm terrified at the thought of using anything from Seagate to store my data on. I lost countless projects, personal data and things I needed, but Seagate isn't gonna get a copulating cent from me anymore. I'm not touching anything coming from them and they can easily rest assured none of my clients EVER will.

    Another detail I'd mention is this: I was on the phone with a Seagate representative and I told them how everything happened (well, basically my partitions were not there in Windows, the drive didn't show up under Device Management...). I'm asked for a serial number and then I'm told: You've just lost your warranty on your Seagate product. (it was legally under warranty that I could have claimed through the shop I got the drive from)

    EXCUSE ME?
    Very bad customer experience - building HDDs to get people to call on you for data recovery and pay over 15x the price of your POS product in order to get their data back. Your business model is not focused on providing reliable storage systems ( HDDs ) - you're not an HDD manufacturer at heart - you're a data recovery company.

    WELL DONE WE'RE DONE, Seagate.

    Also, shall I mention there's a class action suit being prepared against Sh*tgate at the EU level?

    HGST (WD subsidiary) has proven much more reliable throughout the years and they also provide a 5 years warranty (data recovery not included, of course).

    P.S. NEVER provide your HDD's serial number to Seagate on the phone.

    The lesson I'm teaching everyone I can around me is NEVER EVER trust your data to Seagate. NEVER use Seagate products as they don't stand by them and are only interested in making your pockets lighter. Even friends who weren't aware about this company now know what to avoid in their systems.

    Whenever you have to choose storage - consider SSDs first and if capacities don't fit the budget, pick something more reliable from either HGST, WD...I can't really speak for Toshiba drives but I doubt they're as problematic as Seagate's I rememebr reading Backblaze's reliability reports and thinking : It all makes sense to me now. People said they hadn't tested Seagate drives properly and that their technique was flawed, but they were right.
    Reply
  • RedJaron
    Paul, any chance you or Chris R might review a basic consumer spindle drive soon? I know they're not the "sexy" thing right now with new SSDs and high-capacity enterprise storage getting released. But considering most consumer builds still include a TB or two of spindle storage, I'd be interested to see if there have been any significant advances in the last 3 - 5 years. In particular, the WD Blue 1TB is 7200 rpm while the 2TB model is 5400 rpm. Is 5400 still a curse word in today's spindle drives?
    Reply
  • PaulAlcorn
    18390300 said:
    Paul, any chance you or Chris R might review a basic consumer spindle drive soon? I know they're not the "sexy" thing right now with new SSDs and high-capacity enterprise storage getting released. But considering most consumer builds still include a TB or two of spindle storage, I'd be interested to see if there have been any significant advances in the last 3 - 5 years. In particular, the WD Blue 1TB is 7200 rpm while the 2TB model is 5400 rpm. Is 5400 still a curse word in today's spindle drives?

    There is actually something in the pipeline right now, so we should have something for you soon(ish). I am not sure about the test pool yet, but those are good suggestions. :)
    Reply
  • logainofhades
    I really want 2x8tb drives for a Raid 1 setup, but the cost is still too high. :(
    Reply