Torn between which WD drives

[No gods, no masters.]

So im building a new rig soon and i am torn between which drive should i purchase
first off heres the planned setup:
boot drive - (already bought) Apacer 128GB
high speed cache for adobe crap and windows crap - (planned) 2 cheap 128GB ssds in raid 0
games and raw/finished projects - (still planing)

i do alot of gaming and vfx works on my pc
im also planing to build a game server out of my old parts (current specs plus another cheap 128gb ssd for low power consumption)

im currently deciding which hdd to buy-
2 x 2 TB wd blues 5400 rpm in Raid 0
1 x 4 TB wd blues 5400 rpm in Raid 0
1 x 2 TB wd black 7200 rpm (however very expensive in my area)
2 x 2 TB wd red 5400 rpm in Raid 0

any experienced user can tell me the EXACT speed difference between a wd blue 5400rpm vs 7200 vs wd black 7200 rpm?

also please dont recommend me seagate drives, i've already had a few of them failed on my already

[Hello Kitty]

cheaper but als faster then WD Black is WD Gold which is real good in RAID. Recently tested it out with RAID-10 for redundancy.

WD Blue =/= WD Cavier Blue (up to 1TB)

WD Blue = rebranded WD Green (5400 rpm)
WD Cavier Blue 7200 rpm which are faster.

An inbetween solution is a WD Purple which is with its 5900 rpm still way faster then any Seagate 7200 rpm HDD because of lower acess times and higher read/write speed.

[ugafan]

i don't know the exact speed differences, other than 7200 is faster. i haven't noticed a difference between blue and black, but i've never tried to benchmark them.

what about wd gold, which is supposedly their best hdd? maybe more than you want to spend, but the 4 tb is on sale for $180.

[Hello Kitty]

Publicado originalmente por ugafan:

i don't know the exact speed differences, other than 7200 is faster. i haven't noticed a difference between blue and black, but i've never tried to benchmark them.

what about wd gold, which is supposedly their best hdd? maybe more than you want to spend, but the 4 tb is on sale for $180.

like I wrote often WD Gold is cheaper then WD Black (espacially in germany). Even tho at same rpm GOLD is up to 50% faster depnding on the size. The 10TB has about 280-290MB/s read speed...
Also WD Gold comes with 5 year warranty and a 24/7 lifetime premium customer support which is normally expensive. Its more silent then a WD Balck too btw.

rpm does mean nothing if it comes to the speed of a HDD. Its about access times and read/write speed. The 5900 rpm WD Purple beats any WD Cavier Blue and Seagate 7200 rpm anytime

[chiefputsilao✖️ping]

how about a regular 7200rpm WD blue 1TB?

my local pc shop carries the 7200rpm WD blue 1TB and 5400rpm WD blue 2TB.
available models may vary in your location.

[No gods, no masters.]

Publicado originalmente por Hello Kitty:

Publicado originalmente por ugafan:

i don't know the exact speed differences, other than 7200 is faster. i haven't noticed a difference between blue and black, but i've never tried to benchmark them.

what about wd gold, which is supposedly their best hdd? maybe more than you want to spend, but the 4 tb is on sale for $180.

like I wrote often WD Gold is cheaper then WD Black (espacially in germany). Even tho at same rpm GOLD is up to 50% faster depnding on the size. The 10TB has about 280-290MB/s read speed...
Also WD Gold comes with 5 year warranty and a 24/7 lifetime premium customer support which is normally expensive. Its more silent then a WD Balck too btw.

rpm does mean nothing if it comes to the speed of a HDD. Its about access times and read/write speed. The 5900 rpm WD Purple beats any WD Cavier Blue and Seagate 7200 rpm anytime

Publicado originalmente por ugafan:

i don't know the exact speed differences, other than 7200 is faster. i haven't noticed a difference between blue and black, but i've never tried to benchmark them.

what about wd gold, which is supposedly their best hdd? maybe more than you want to spend, but the 4 tb is on sale for $180.

Publicado originalmente por Hello Kitty:

cheaper but als faster then WD Black is WD Gold which is real good in RAID. Recently tested it out with RAID-10 for redundancy.

WD Blue =/= WD Cavier Blue (up to 1TB)

WD Blue = rebranded WD Green (5400 rpm)
WD Cavier Blue 7200 rpm which are faster.

An inbetween solution is a WD Purple which is with its 5900 rpm still way faster then any Seagate 7200 rpm HDD because of lower acess times and higher read/write speed.

so wd gold > any other config?

wasnt wd gold supposed to be a datacenter drive?

also can i have the 5400 rpm blue and 7200 rpm black speed for comparison?

Publicado originalmente por chiefputsi✖✖✖ 上 没什么 老挝:

how about a regular 7200rpm WD blue 1TB?

my local pc shop carries the 7200rpm WD blue 1TB and 5400rpm WD blue 2TB.
available models may vary in your location.

1tb is too little for what i do, im also currently using a 1tb 7200rpm and i filled it 95% already

[Seven7]

2x2Tb WD Black + 2x2Tb WD Black for work system
4x6Tb WD Blue for backups

[Hello Kitty]

Yes WD Gold is a datacenter HDD build for maximum performance and durability. But there is no difference to just any other 3.5" HDD. Normally datacenter drives are loud as datacenters dont need to be silent. But surprisingly WD Gold is way cheaper and even more silent but dont ask me why.

[Kurwa bober]

Get the 7200rpm black, you wont regret

[vadim]

Don't use RAID at all. Its useless for home PCs.

[Hello Kitty]

Publicado originalmente por aNfRa:

Get the 7200rpm black, you wont regret

read above? Black is already outdated for new drives. Gold is just faster it is also cheaper.

Publicado originalmente por vadim:

Don't use RAID at all. Its useless for home PCs.

depends on what you do and if you have the money for it...

[vadim]

Publicado originalmente por Hello Kitty:

depends on what you do and if you have the money for it...

Single HDD just works and you dont lose any data even in case of power failure.

[Hello Kitty]

Publicado originalmente por vadim:

Publicado originalmente por Hello Kitty:

depends on what you do and if you have the money for it...

Single HDD just works and you dont lose any data even in case of power failure.

you wont with RAID too. In RAID 1 or RAID 10 you even have the highest redundancy.

[vadim]

Publicado originalmente por Hello Kitty:

you wont with RAID too. In RAID 1 or RAID 10 you even have the highest redundancy.

But you will need to rebuild array all the times. Not the most exciting thing. And, as you can see, OP wants RAID 0.

[Hello Kitty]

Publicado originalmente por vadim:

Publicado originalmente por Hello Kitty:

you wont with RAID too. In RAID 1 or RAID 10 you even have the highest redundancy.

But you will need to rebuild array all the times. Not the most exciting thing. And, as you can see, OP wants RAID 0.

you know when an crashes? It crashed when a HDD fails/dies. IF a HDD fails/dies then with a single HDD youre screwed too. With RAID 1 and RAID 10 you have a backup...

[vadim]

Publicado originalmente por Hello Kitty:

you know when an crashes?

You need to rebuld after the each failure. And you cannot use drives until rebuild completes. And rebuild time doesn't depend on free space at all - even if you use only 1GB disk space on TB drive, you will need to rebuild all TB.