Why the price is same when their a big difference in size and speed?

[Yuvraj Mann]

The WD HDD is 50% heavier and bigger than Seagate drive, but Seagate HDD is slightly faster. The price was also same when i bought them online, and I could see size difference in pictures where i bought these.

 

 

 

[minibois]

5 minutes ago, Yuvraj Mann said:

The WD HDD is 50% heavier and bigger than Seagate drive, but Seagate HDD is slightly faster. The price was also same when i bought them online, and I could see size difference in pictures where i bought these.

Title:

Quote

Why the price is same when their a big difference in size and speed?

They are the same size (physical and capacity wise), the speed is 5400RPM vs. 7200RPM, which is basically speed vs. capacity.

What are you exactly asking?

[Yuvraj Mann]

5 minutes ago, minibois said:

Title:

They are the same size (physical and capacity wise), the speed is 5400RPM vs. 7200RPM, which is basically speed vs. capacity.

What are you exactly asking?

they both are 5400rpm, and the wdd hdd is thicker

[minibois]

5 minutes ago, Yuvraj Mann said:

they both are 5400rpm, and the wdd hdd is thicker

Alright, assumed the Seagate was 7200RPM, as that is the more common variety of it.

But still, what are you asking?

If it's about the thickness; that probably has to do with the platter the manufacturer chose to use.

[Bwithnewcast]

8 minutes ago, Yuvraj Mann said:

they both are 5400rpm, and the wdd hdd is thicker

The seagate drive is helium filled while the wd is not

[Jurrunio]

They arent built to be portable so mass doesn't mean much. As for size, they are both 3.5" drives so that's practically the same as well.

 

I guess Seagate's reputation is worse than WD's?

[cobalt77]

The reason why the seagate is faster is that the ST2000dm005 has 256 MB of cache and the WD20EZRZ has 64 MB. But cache is really only a buffer, because both are 5400rpm drives if you put both drives in a task where the cache is full (example: the computer can supply data faster than the drive can write it, causing the computer to slow the rate it is sending) then they would be near to identical. 
Looking at the stats for the drives there is not a big difference in speed or height. The WD20EZRZ is near to identical to the ST2000dm005 in length and width, and is 5.9 mm taller. If your including weight in your meaning of size then yes WD20EZRZ weighs 185 g more than the ST2000dm005.  As minibois pointed out, all that can be explained by the design choices the manufactures made, in the case of the WD it probably has one more platter in it. 
Actually the Seagate ST2000dm006 (2 TB, 7200 RPM, 64 MB cache) sold in a lot of places for the same or near to the same price as the ST2000dm005 model that was out at the time. Comparing the stats of ST2000dm006 to the WD20EZRZ is interesting as they are very close on weight and height, and the ST2000dm006 does have a extra platter than ST2000dm005. Which would suggest the  WD20EZRZ would to.

 

Right now if I walked into a computer store and had to grab one Seagate and one WD drive with the closest specs to your two, in the area I live (global distribution is a tad messed up right now) they would probably be a WD Blue 2TB WD20EZAZ and a 2TB ST2000DM008 for $10 ($6-7 USD) more than the WD. The WD20EZRZ  has been out of production for years now and I have not seen a ST2000dm005 since they started to remove the compute naming off the 2 TB drives. WD20EZAZ (5400rpm, 256 MB cache and on average probably around $10 USD cheaper than the average price of the WD20EZRZ when it came out) is the same height as your WD20EZRZ and weighs near to the same as your ST2000dm005, WD HDD generally are the same height, Seagate drives vary on how much space is needed between two heights of around 2cm and 2.6cm. ST2000DM008 (7200rpm, 256 MB cache) has the same dimensions as the ST2000dm005 and weighs 75g more.

What is your question? The direct answer is because that is what you paid for them. If by "i bought them online" you mean they were second hand and the question is why were they the same price when they are different slightly from each other. Then you would have to ask the seller to get the real answer, at a guess the seller didn't know or care about the differences and priced on age and storage capacity. Are you concerned that you were ripped off in some way? Are you just interested in the differences? 

[Yuvraj Mann]

On 3/25/2020 at 1:21 AM, cobalt77 said:

The reason why the seagate is faster is that the ST2000dm005 has 256 MB of cache and the WD20EZRZ has 64 MB. But cache is really only a buffer, because both are 5400rpm drives if you put both drives in a task where the cache is full (example: the computer can supply data faster than the drive can write it, causing the computer to slow the rate it is sending) then they would be near to identical. 
Looking at the stats for the drives there is not a big difference in speed or height. The WD20EZRZ is near to identical to the ST2000dm005 in length and width, and is 5.9 mm taller. If your including weight in your meaning of size then yes WD20EZRZ weighs 185 g more than the ST2000dm005.  As minibois pointed out, all that can be explained by the design choices the manufactures made, in the case of the WD it probably has one more platter in it. 
Actually the Seagate ST2000dm006 (2 TB, 7200 RPM, 64 MB cache) sold in a lot of places for the same or near to the same price as the ST2000dm005 model that was out at the time. Comparing the stats of ST2000dm006 to the WD20EZRZ is interesting as they are very close on weight and height, and the ST2000dm006 does have a extra platter than ST2000dm005. Which would suggest the  WD20EZRZ would to.

 

Right now if I walked into a computer store and had to grab one Seagate and one WD drive with the closest specs to your two, in the area I live (global distribution is a tad messed up right now) they would probably be a WD Blue 2TB WD20EZAZ and a 2TB ST2000DM008 for $10 ($6-7 USD) more than the WD. The WD20EZRZ  has been out of production for years now and I have not seen a ST2000dm005 since they started to remove the compute naming off the 2 TB drives. WD20EZAZ (5400rpm, 256 MB cache and on average probably around $10 USD cheaper than the average price of the WD20EZRZ when it came out) is the same height as your WD20EZRZ and weighs near to the same as your ST2000dm005, WD HDD generally are the same height, Seagate drives vary on how much space is needed between two heights of around 2cm and 2.6cm. ST2000DM008 (7200rpm, 256 MB cache) has the same dimensions as the ST2000dm005 and weighs 75g more.

What is your question? The direct answer is because that is what you paid for them. If by "i bought them online" you mean they were second hand and the question is why were they the same price when they are different slightly from each other. Then you would have to ask the seller to get the real answer, at a guess the seller didn't know or care about the differences and priced on age and storage capacity. Are you concerned that you were ripped off in some way? Are you just interested in the differences? 

thanks for so much information, i just need to know which one is better in terms of long life ? and which one i need to go for next time i buy a HDD? 

[cobalt77]

5 hours ago, Yuvraj Mann said:

thanks for so much information, i just need to know which one is better in terms of long life ? and which one i need to go for next time i buy a HDD? 

Are they second hand? If they are then its going to be a guess which one is going to live longer as you don't know the history of the drives. With new or second hand drives it is good practice to download and use a program like CrystalDiskInfo (its free https://crystalmark.info/en/software/crystaldiskinfo/ ) to have a look at the disk health on a regular basis (like once or twice a year) and if you catch a drive failing, transfer the data off it on to another drive and get rid of it.  As for which HDD to buy in relation to buying second hand, buy the one that is a good price, and the seller has done a health check on and came back good (and after you buy do a health check to see if the results are near to the same, people will lie/fake health checks to sell drives) or you know the history of (and has had a low stress life).  

 

So the short answer is: don't know which one will last longer, everything being equal in their past history then they should live about the same time if treated identically. But do test the health. As for future buys, it depends on what is available, the health of the drives, and what you think is a fair price.

That answer your questions? any more/new questions?