I recently oerdered a barebones kit with Samsung HD103SJ 1TB <b>7200rpm 32mb cache</b> drive. It was bad from day one so sent it back to replace for another new one.
The company returned a Western Digital WD10EARS Caviar Green 1TB <b>5400rpm 64mb cache</b>

I wrote back to the company just asking why they didn't send another 7200rpm drive and this is the response I got from the support technician:



I think this doesn't sound right
Especially the


I've already loaded OS and apps onto the drive and it seems to be peppy but then again i've upgraded the mb and processor too so i'm wondering if this dude was telling the truth at all.

TIA
Harry

Very short: The spindle rotation speed of a HDD affects access time (seek time + rotational delay). It also affects media transfer rate. More speed is obviously better... there is a reason for why 15k spin HDDs are available at high costs.

It is also true that lack of rotational speed can be compensated by a RAM cache. But the effect of this is very dependent on the "layout" of data on the platters. The cache will probably be less effective when reading data from very non sequential LBAs. For example reading data from a heavily fragmented disk.

However, high rotational speed does not come without costs. More speed (and more density) implies more bit errors when reading, which have to be compensated with longer crc fields. But this is one of the issues addressed by Advanced Format drives (4K sectors).

For rotation speed and cache, I would go for a Winnie the Pooh approach: "Both, please". The only green drives seen at my place are the defect ones from my clients. Although I probably wouldnt mind using them for storing file backups.


Slightly tongue in cheek: Green drives are intellispeed, IE they can only go slower...

@Harry Simpson:

There are many factual inaccuracies in that response from your supplier. Unfortunately it shows how people who are expected to know what they are talking about, are actually misleading the public - in this case, you.

As Eleg says, the difference between performance between those drives will depend on several factors, including filesystem layout. It depends how you are using the drive, as to whether there would be a difference which you would notice.

@Eleg:

"Green drives are intellispeed, IE they can only go slower..."

FYI, before they hid the technical details by removing them from their website, WD explained that for each Intellipower drive model "WD may use a different, invariable RPM", so the drive speed (RPM) does not change to go slower.

Although the relevant WD web pages I found have been edited or removed, there are still several retailers using WD-supplied product descriptions which confirm that info, and the topic is discussed here in some detail:

http://www.silentpcreview.com/article786-page2.html

so really no direct answer here other than the clerk who quoted all this may have not know what he's talking about. I do a lot of photo processing and video editing. Should I go to the trouble of returning this for a true 7200rpm drive even if its 32 mb cache. Are they ripping me off by passing off the 5400 64mb cache drive?

That's because the answer is "it depends". There are pros and cons of either choice, as you must already know by the research that you did for your original decision.

We don't have your PC and your exact workload, to then run comparison benchmarks. The fact that the makes of the two disks are different, would also be a factor for some people (including me), yet it seems not to be a factor for you (you're just talking about speed, but not reliability, for example).

So of course there is no direct answer, because you are (understandably) not able to supply the necessary info & equipment to "remote" readers of this forum. Any answer would be a guess - an educated guess perhaps, but a guess nevertheless. I'm disappointed that you're criticising the comments you've received as "no direct answer", so I'll let you wait for guesses from other readers

I agree with Vulcan.

And to add something more to this conversation, I'd say that this particular WD drive has been piling up to our incoming stack, ever since it has been released (along with the other -so called- Green series). If that means anything regarding reliability, that is...

_________________
http://www.northwind.gr
SandForce SSD Recovery
Ransomware Reverse Engineering - NoMoreRansom! partners

Harry,

The EARS is crap compared to the Samsung.. Did I answer your question? ;o)

_________________
All went well until I plugged the drive in.

I decided to use Google (my old friend) to find a comparison review.

http://www.behardware.com/articles/799- ... rives.html

Now you can decide for yourself

_________________
All went well until I plugged the drive in.

@guru:
Nice find on that website

I would certainly choose the Samsung too

Whether the OP should return the WD drive, considering that he reports the system performance as "peppy" with that drive fitted, has already installed the OS & apps, for a performance difference that he may not notice in his usage, and with the risks (& costs?) of shipping drives and dealing with his vendor, seems a more complex decision IMHO. As always YMMV

Yep didn't mean to offend you.

You didn't offend me . I guess I was too direct then.

_________________
All went well until I plugged the drive in.