WD Question?

[Guest]

What is the difference between the Blue 3.5 1Tb drive and the Black 3.5 1Tb drive?

[Jerakl]

@Captain_WD

Such avatar

[JoaoPRSousa]

Speeeeeeeeeeeeeeed, RPMs it is.

The Blue reaches 7200RPM and the Black 10000

Which means, the Black is faster...

Warning: This is BS, I'm wrong, they both spin at the same speed.

Edited November 20, 2014 by JoaoPRSousa

[Jerakl]

Speeeeeeeeeeeeeeed, RPMs it is.

The Blue reaches 7200RPM and the Black 10000

Which means, the Black is faster...

I thought the velociraptor one was the one that did 10K RPM

[andre82693]

Generally, blacks are for games/performance, blues are for standard users, greens are for mass storage.

 

[JoaoPRSousa]

I thought the velociraptor one was the one that did 10K RPM

Was it? I might be wrong...

[Guest]

Speeeeeeeeeeeeeeed, RPMs it is.

The Blue reaches 7200RPM and the Black 10000

Which means, the Black is faster...

Lies

http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.aspx?id=760#Tab3

They are both 7200 rpm

[EzioSan]

warranty.nothing more.....dont pay more for the  black  version

[JoaoPRSousa]

Generally, blacks are for games/performance, blues are for standard users, greens are for mass storage.

I'm a gamer and I have a Blue...

[Jerakl]

Lies

http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.aspx?id=760#Tab3

They are both 7200 rpm

 

Was it? I might be wrong...

Would seem you were.

[JoaoPRSousa]

Lies

http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.aspx?id=760#Tab3

They are both 7200 rpm

Yes, I'm wrong...

[d3sl91]

Speeeeeeeeeeeeeeed, RPMs it is.

The Blue reaches 7200RPM and the Black 10000

Which means, the Black is faster...

Yeah, Black and Blue are Both 7200RPM

 

Black = Higher Cache (sometimes) and zero acoustic properties (AAM turned off), 5 year warranty.

 

Blue = Smaller cache (sometimes) and is a bit quieter/cooler at the expense of raw performance (AAM turned on), also 2/3 year warranty.

[WoodenMarker]

 

zero acoustic properties

The words being used here can be pretty misleading.  

warranty.nothing more.....dont pay more for the  black  version

Not nothing more. The Black performs better and is advertised as a high performance drive. 

[EzioSan]

 

 

 

The words being used here can be pretty misleading.  

Not nothing more. The Black performs better and is advertised as a high performance drive. 

 

its not  peforming better. not anymore.

theres a reason  why i   posted that video ( which is a week old  max)

[d3sl91]

its not  peforming better. not anymore.

theres a reason  why i   posted that video ( which is a week old  max)

Yeah, anymore, the reason I buy blacks is for the warranty. I have found most drives start to fail after 3 years, so, having that extra warranty is very nice - and I have used it a few times. 

 

Also, SIZE. You cannot get a blue in more than 1TB. If you want a 7200RPM drive in 2+TB, black is your only option. 

[EmeraldFlame]

warranty.nothing more.....dont pay more for the  black  version

 

This simply isn't true. 

Blacks typically have more cache (64MB) while blues could have different amounts of cache (16, 32, or 64MB) depending on the model and capacity. The WD Blacks also have 2 on board processors which help significantly in large queue depth read/writes, and for small random I/O.

 

its not  peforming better. not anymore.

theres a reason  why i   posted that video ( which is a week old  max)

 

That's not necessarily true. Some Blue's might perform as well as the blacks, but it depends largely on what model you get, and how much cache that model has, and what kind of IO you are doing. In sequential, they will be about the same, in small file IO, the black will be much better. 

While that video may be only a week old, you may want to watch and listen to it a little closer, he is using drives that are multiple model years old, and not even from the same model year (2012 &2013). And if you look closely he went with the higher end Blue that does have 64MB of cache, so tests with that drive won't be indicative of the entire line. You will also notice in his benchmarks he states that the Black was better in small IO, but doesn't say by how much, and then he disabled the small IO tests in the second benchmark. Then he talks about failure rates and pulls up a completely unrelated graphic from BackBlaze's study that doesn't even address the specific drives in question. I personally wouldn't consider that video credible in any way.

[EzioSan]

Yeah, anymore, the reason I buy blacks is for the warranty. I have found most drives start to fail after 3 years, so, having that extra warranty is very nice - and I have used it a few times. 

 

Also, SIZE. You cannot get a blue in more than 1TB. If you want a 7200RPM drive in 2+TB, black is your only option. 

he  asked what is the difference betweed 1tb  blue and 1tb black. it is the warranty,as i told  him.

[EzioSan]

This simply isn't true. 

Blacks typically have more cache (64MB) while blues could have different amounts of cache (16, 32, or 64MB) depending on the model and capacity. The WD Blacks also have 2 on board processors which help significantly in large queue depth read/writes, and for small random I/O.

 

 

That's not necessarily true. Some Blue's might perform as well as the blacks, but it depends largely on what model you get, and how much cache that model has, and what kind of IO you are doing. In sequential, they will be about the same, in small file IO, the black will be much better. 

While that video may be only a week old, you may want to watch and listen to it a little closer, he is using drives that are multiple model years old, and not even from the same model year (2012 &2013). And if you look closely he went with the higher end Blue that does have 64MB of cache, so tests with that drive won't be indicative of the entire line. You will also notice in his benchmarks he states that the Black was better in small IO, but doesn't say by how much, and then he disabled the small IO tests in the second benchmark. I personally wouldn't consider that video credible in any way.

i  agree

[GloriousPain]

What is the difference between the Blue 3.5 1Tb drive and the Black 3.5 1Tb drive?

There isn't in all reality

[Captain_WD]

What is the difference between the Blue 3.5 1Tb drive and the Black 3.5 1Tb drive?

 

Hey TopGear9,

 

Sorry for the late response. 

 

The guys mentioned several stuff and a video and most of the things are correct.

WD Blue drives range from 80GB to 1TB in capacity and 8MB to 64MB in cache as well as they come in two different interfaces (SATA3 and PATA). 

On the other hand, WD Black drives range from 500GB to 4TB in capacity and are all with 64MB cache and all have SATA3 interface. 

This is why both series are overlapping at the 1TB point where both have equal storage space, rpm, cache and interface. 

The difference is that WD Blue is designed for everyday usage and simple computing and is marketed this way while WD Black is designed for a bit heavier workloads and longer usage (as longer power-on times compared to WD Blue). It is given longer warranty because of all that and it is build to sustain those heavier workloads. 

 

Speaking with numbers, According to the SpecSheet of both drives (For WD Blue: http://goo.gl/x2utPA, for WD Black: http://goo.gl/98TyWI), there shouldn't be any difference in speed or noise, but if you dig through the internet for independent benchmarks, you can find many people actually reporting that the WD Black actually has better read/write speed as well as random seek times but it is a bit louder. The WD Black actually consumes less wattage during standby/sleep times.

 

The confusion most of the time comes from the fact that the two series are basically designed, built and marketed for different purposes and work better under different circumstances. The fact that they have an overlapping models (the 1TB, 64MB cache, 7,200 rpm, SATA3) is what confuses people and the only apparent difference is the longer warranty. They are, in fact, designed for different purposes during their manufacturing.

 

Your best way to see if they are different in any way is to have them tested head to head under different circumstances (temperature, loads, power-on times, benchmark software, etc.) and see for yourself.

 

Hope this makes it a bit clear,

 

Captain_WD. 

[Guest]

 

Hey TopGear9,

 

Sorry for the late response. 

 

The guys mentioned several stuff and a video and most of the things are correct.

WD Blue drives range from 80GB to 1TB in capacity and 8MB to 64MB in cache as well as they come in two different interfaces (SATA3 and PATA). 

On the other hand, WD Black drives range from 500GB to 4TB in capacity and are all with 64MB cache and all have SATA3 interface. 

This is why both series are overlapping at the 1TB point where both have equal storage space, rpm, cache and interface. 

The difference is that WD Blue is designed for everyday usage and simple computing and is marketed this way while WD Black is designed for a bit heavier workloads and longer usage (as longer power-on times compared to WD Blue). It is given longer warranty because of all that and it is build to sustain those heavier workloads. 

 

Speaking with numbers, According to the SpecSheet of both drives (For WD Blue: http://goo.gl/x2utPA, for WD Black: http://goo.gl/98TyWI), there shouldn't be any difference in speed or noise, but if you dig through the internet for independent benchmarks, you can find many people actually reporting that the WD Black actually has better read/write speed as well as random seek times but it is a bit louder. The WD Black actually consumes less wattage during standby/sleep times.

 

The confusion most of the time comes from the fact that the two series are basically designed, built and marketed for different purposes and work better under different circumstances. The fact that they have an overlapping models (the 1TB, 64MB cache, 7,200 rpm, SATA3) is what confuses people and the only apparent difference is the longer warranty. They are, in fact, designed for different purposes during their manufacturing.

 

Your best way to see if they are different in any way is to have them tested head to head under different circumstances (temperature, loads, power-on times, benchmark software, etc.) and see for yourself.

 

Hope this makes it a bit clear,

 

Captain_WD. 

 

Thank you!

[d3sl91]

 

-stuff from WD master dude - 

 

I will never answer WD HDD questions again. Just going to @captain_WD. (JK).

[Captain_WD]

Thank you!

 

You are welcome

 

I got some more info that if you are to run both drives side-by-side, the WD Black should outperform the WD Blue as it is tuned for performance and durability. The WD Black also has a dual-core processor and is FIT tested which enables it to perform better that the regular WD Blue drives.

 

Feel free to ask if you have any questions

 

Captain_WD.