RPM Ratings of Modern Hard Drives

Discussion in 'Hardware Discussion & Support' started by IvanV, Sep 9, 2019.

  1. IvanV

    IvanV HH Assassin Guild Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    10,373
    Likes Received:
    1,626
    Trophy Points:
    138
    I know that hard drives aren't the coolest components out there, but hey, I'm a hoarder, and it looks like I'll be in the market for something around the 4TB range fairly soon. (I just did a really quick cleanup of my main data partition this morning and got back to around 280GB free, but then I took the Uplay+ promotion and downloaded AC Odyssey and now I'm down to 170. I guess I'll uninstall it when the month ends and there's more crap that I could get rid of, but the writing is on the wall - I need more space.)

    Therefore, I took a look at the hardware listings and saw that 4-6TB drives cost around what I expected, but then I noticed a weird thing - all of the drives were 5400 or 5900rpm models. Last time I bought a hard drive, normally they were spinning at 7200rpm, except for WD Green and the likes, cheap models which were usually built to a lower quality standard and thus less reliable, but now it's WD Blue and Purple and various Seagates too. So what gives? Are all HDDs now crap, or are WD Blues, Purples and other stuff rated for 24/7 operation still fine? What about the performance? I know that, due to the high density, they should be just fine as far as sequential reading is concerned, but seek times on 3.5" 5x00rpm hard drives?! Sounds bad! But how bad is it?

    I'm fully aware of the existence of SSDs, but at the moment, I need the space more badly and funds are limited, plus I'm curious, so what gives? Is 5400rpm the new norm? Are the new drives as reliable as the old ones and are they actually worse performing, or is there some trickery, like more heads?
     
  2. Calliers

    Calliers Just got off the hedonic treadmill... Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2004
    Messages:
    44,402
    Likes Received:
    2,897
    Trophy Points:
    139
    Well the fact of the matter is that 5400rpm drives are crap. There's just no other way to slice it. When SSD technology began coming out, manufacturers kind of stopped innovation on magnetic drives, and that is the reason higher capacity magnetic drives all spin at 5400rpm for the most part. They may be slow, but if you get a good brand they will be a little more realiable.

    But if you don't have the cash for a 4TB SSD, you just don't have the money. My advice to you, just bite the bullet and get a 5400rpm 4TB or 6TB drive now, and later on when SSDs are much cheaper you can upgrade. I have two 1TB SSDs in my PC, paid an arm and a leg for the Samsung one, paid a more reasonable price for the other, but I also have two 1TB magnetic drives and am not really much of a hoarder so I don't really need a lot of space anyway. And I tend to play a game, finish it then delete it, I never really go back to games that I have already finished. But then again, that's just me.
     
  3. Judas

    Judas Obvious Closet Brony Pony

    Joined:
    May 13, 2002
    Messages:
    38,489
    Likes Received:
    913
    Trophy Points:
    138
    actually 5400rpm drives aren't crap.... far from it.

    In fact a slew of drives don't even have a fixed RPM anymore... mostly due to power savings and adjusting depending on usage for best performance or ideal seeks and so forth.

    Hardrive RPMs are almost entirely irrelevant these days with that all in mind. For example WD's black series drives are common 7200rpm where as the reds are 5400rpm or there abouts. In most head to head comparisons of large capacity drives, they don't perform all the different, in fact in just as many cases, the reds were faster or just better... REDs are for NAS storage however, but they are phenominal as primary OS drives too due to some of their really fine tuned firmware and adaptive capabilities.

    The black on the other hand while managed to spit out some obviously higher numbers in a few senarios, were often much louder, more clickety and frankly their failure rates aren't too pleasant, specially compared to the NAS.

    I've a WD gold which is basically the pinnacle of WD's consumer or prosumer... and when i compared it directly with the WD... they performed pretty damn close to each other as well. Would i suggest paying the insane premium for a gold? No...

    Even the Purples are pretty damn impressive.

    I avoid the blues and the greens from any company are always to be avoided as they perform like utter shit and i've WAY too man green and blue drives piled up at my store due to failures, along with about half as many blacks.

    Seagate is to be avoided like the plague in almost all cases... fyi...


    I should however state that there are hybrid SSDHDs... a combination of say 4 to 8 or maybe 16GB of SSD cache onboard along with the spinning rust.

    I sold dozens of machines both laptops and desktops with the Seagate Momentus XTs.... hell even samsung had some models listed that were just rebadged Seagate Momentus XTs. There were 7200 and 5400rpm 2.5" versions. I know many companies now have hybrid 3.5" drives too, but most of the large capacity ones last i checked were pure drive with 64-128MB caches.
     
    Calliers likes this.
  4. Calliers

    Calliers Just got off the hedonic treadmill... Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2004
    Messages:
    44,402
    Likes Received:
    2,897
    Trophy Points:
    139
    I've never liked Seagate drives from the get go. Nor have I trusted them.
     
  5. IvanV

    IvanV HH Assassin Guild Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    10,373
    Likes Received:
    1,626
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Every Manufacturer (Seagate, Maxtor, Hitachi...) has had some series or batch that were craptastic, so one really needs to look at who's doing well and who's doing poorly at the moment.

    Apparently, there are 5400rpm WD purples and 7200rpm ones and the same goes for Seagate. They don't import the higher grade ones much here, though. I was able to spot a Toshiba drive that fits the bill on paper (and is supposedly really fairly decent): 4TB, 7200rpm, 128MB cache.
     
  6. Tyrsonswood

    Tyrsonswood HH's curmudgeon

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2008
    Messages:
    13,221
    Likes Received:
    943
    Trophy Points:
    138
    I'm not so sure RPM has much to do with data read and write speed or quality like it did years ago... Data throughput, access times and density are up so the speed of the platters wouldn't matter as much as it used to. And a "slower" drive should generate less heat, less noise, and last longer. (technically)


    But, I no longer follow market trends so what would I know.
     
  7. Calliers

    Calliers Just got off the hedonic treadmill... Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2004
    Messages:
    44,402
    Likes Received:
    2,897
    Trophy Points:
    139
    I speak against Seagate drives, yet have one in my PC, go figure.
     
  8. Judas

    Judas Obvious Closet Brony Pony

    Joined:
    May 13, 2002
    Messages:
    38,489
    Likes Received:
    913
    Trophy Points:
    138
    I've only had bad troubles with the seagate 3.5" drives.. the 2.5" like the momentus ones have been fine.

    If you look at the yearly report for drive failures percentages on their sold quantity, seagate usually remains at the top of the list for being bad.

    Due to the data density of the drives these days, throughput of 200MB/s isn't totally off the wall with most averaging in the 100-150MB/s range... like i said, it's mostly irrelevant these days, specially since almost all the the HDs being bought and installed are being almost entirely used as storage and not as primary OS/Program/Game drives.
     

Share This Page

visited