Seems like a big delta but considering the use for non-solid state storage these days is bulk storage, that's as close to irrelevant as possible. We're probably talking 120MB/s versus 160MB/s sequential. And I am aware that generally Western Digital has a better reputation in terms of reliability than Seagate, but I have owned drives from both companies with no real issues since HDD failures are usually rare in general. Is this just a marketing scheme to make the product look better and discounted compared to the Barracuda or is there an improvement in Western Digital's hard drive architecture that makes its 5400RPM drive better or faster than the 7200RPM? Which one should I buy? However, when I looked at the drives for sale, I saw that a Seagate Barracuda 2TB at 7200RPM is about the same price as a Western Digital Blue 2TB 5400RPM, but the Western Digital Blue has a significantly higher retail price at $99.99. I understand that 5400RPM is quieter and more reliable than 7200, but it is also slower or should be slower.
My question though is that most drives nowadays are coming out at the 5400RPM speed rather than the normal 7200 RPM speed. I'm thinking of going with 2TBs this time around instead of the normal 1TB. Hey guys, expanding my storage out as I filled up another 1TB Harddrive.
0 kommentar(er)
