Originally Posted by srsparky32
thats a little slow on the reads for a 10k rpm drive. the seagate 7200.14's get around the same as that
I was not aware of this drive but I based my drive choice on speed/reliability/warranty and I already had my mind set on the raptors so I didn't do much research to see what else was out there. But I'm happy to have found out about the performance of the Seagate drives!
In any case I looked around and found a few HD Tune benches of the Seagate 7200.14 2TB drive and I will agree that the performance is roughly the same but the access time is always much lower on the raptors (usually twice as low). From what I saw in fact of benches is as follows:Minimum read speed
The minimum speed was consistently higher on the VR although sometimes the Seagate came close within 5-15MB/s.Maximum read speed
The maximum speed tends to be higher most of the time on the Seagate by 10-20MB/s.Average read speed
The Seagate seems about on par with the average speed of the VR, sometimes higher by 10-15MB/s and sometimes lower by 10-25MB/s.
One reason that can affect the performance of the Seagate drive is how many platters the drive has, apparently that model of hard drive has different variants with different number of platters (from what I saw in a few threads). So it would appear that this Seagate drive competes at roughly the same level of performance as the VR but at a much lower price point.
This is great if you are on a budget or want to save money but you have to factor in some additional points to make a truly educated decision. For one they are not in the same category, the VR is an Enterprise class drive while the Seagate is a consumer class Desktop drive. Now on to the reliability aspect of the drives, because they are in different classes WD uses the MTBF to rate the reliability of the VR and Seagate uses the AFR for its consumer products which makes direct comparison harder but Seagate still lists the MTBF on its Enterprise class drives. The Seagate drive being a consumer class drive is not designed from the ground up to be a 24/7 drive as it lists an AFR power-on hours rating of 2400 hours/year. This does not mean that the drive won't stand up to many years of running 24/7, but expect a higher chance of failure vs the VR when running the drive 24/7. Finally on the warranty side, the VR drive has a 5 year warranty vs the Seagate 2 year warranty.
To wrap it up, considering the performance is roughly the same then it boils down to the price/capacity vs reliability/warranty. Personally I prefer paying a little more to have better peace of mind and lower chances of failure and a long warranty to cover the drive should it ever fail, mainly because I'm not diligent enough at doing my backups.
Speaking of which, I should probably pick up of of those Seagate drives and enclosure to use as my new external backup HDD, my current WD 1TB is still working without issue but two external backups are better than one!