Caviar Black and Blue difference

cinnamon cider

Honorable
Nov 1, 2013
178
0
10,760
I'm curious about the difference of Caviar Black from Blue aside from the longer warranty period of the Black - which is 5 years, and the latter's 2-year warranty.

What I'm trying to compare is:
Caviar Black
WD1003FZEX 7200 RPM 1TB 64MB cache
Caviar Blue
WD10EZEX 7200 RPM 1TB 64MB cache

It's hard to distinguish the performance from paper, and I can't really say if the Black will really consume a lot of power and produce more noise compared to the Blue, because of its advertised performance.

Do you think Black uses higher quality components compared to the Blue(indicated models above)? :)
 
Solution
The Black is only faster than the Blue in a few specific circumstances. Otherwise the Blue is about the same.
Mostly the Black is sold as an enthusiast part and only costs more because of the slightly higher random read and longer warranty. http://hdd.userbenchmark.com/Compare/WD-Black-1TB-2013-vs-WD-Blue-1TB-2012/1822vs1779

Most users will be better off with the Blue, as it has the better cost/performance ratio.

Greens are environmentally friendly, hence the Green. They tend to last longer because they turn themselves off when not in use, which is also the main reason why they're slower for loading things.
Black is for higher transfer rates, blue is middle man, and green is for reliability and durability.

Put it this way.. black is geared for applications and games. Blue is for everyday use, and green is for backup and storage.
 
Thank you for your replies. That is what I've always read on forums - Black is for performance, Blue is for etc. But what I'm really curious is - if Blue is almost at par with Black - or if they almost have the same performance, but Black has a 5 year warranty and if it uses "other" components that Blue doesn't have - making it more reliable.
 
black is faster, and while i dont have personal exp with these (i have blue), i dont think it would be that big a difference. it's still far from an ssd (i have 2 ssd's). so if it was me, get a blue, save up and get at least a 120gb (put os and fav game here).
 
i wanted black also, but it was out of my budget that time, and i was worried about the temps (not that they would get damaged, but just the heat)

it's funny that i don't even have 1tera on my pc, i have a very old 250gb seagate, then the 500gb blue (yup no budget that time), an old intel sata2 80gb ssd, and the latest addition was a 240gb ssd from crucial (it was cheap.. relatively speaking) because bf4 won't fit on my ssd anymore (esp with the dlc's

@ts, don't worry too much, blue or black, both are good
 
I have a full tower with 6 hdd in it. I'm learning as I go, and never really looked into the difference between the colors of the drives. My last 2 hard drives I bought where the blacks at 2tb each. I can't really comment on the noise, because, well, when you have a full tower with 4 120mm fans and 6 hdds running, its gonna be kinda noisey anyways.

I will say however, and knock on wood, none of my wd drives have died. Ever. And I do a lot with media and video editing.

I did however learn something reading this post. So thanks to the poster for saying the greens are nest for storage! Ill be keeping that in mind!
 
The Black is only faster than the Blue in a few specific circumstances. Otherwise the Blue is about the same.
Mostly the Black is sold as an enthusiast part and only costs more because of the slightly higher random read and longer warranty. http://hdd.userbenchmark.com/Compare/WD-Black-1TB-2013-vs-WD-Blue-1TB-2012/1822vs1779

Most users will be better off with the Blue, as it has the better cost/performance ratio.

Greens are environmentally friendly, hence the Green. They tend to last longer because they turn themselves off when not in use, which is also the main reason why they're slower for loading things.
 
Solution

Thanks for the answer, Rationale. It seems like that this would sum-up that Black is "slightly" better than Blue.