Need advice/opinions for new storage

[JordyB]

Hello,

I've got a question which I can't answer, and I need advice. Yes, I did used google etc. but I need opinions.

I currently got a 1TB Seagate Barracuda HDD, and it works fine. But I don't have enough free memory; still got 150GB left, and I noticed that my HDD is a bit slower, and makes a bit more noise. I know it's recommended to keep x-% of total space free to let the HDD perform at it's best (or am I wrong in that?).

Now I'm looking for an extra HDD/SSHD/SSD. But due the budget I'm more interested in a HDD. I've got currently a 500GB external HDD which is dying slowly (too many errors), so I want at least an extra 2TB HDD. And because I can only effort 1 500GB SSD with their price tag, I'm heading towards a HDD(/SSHD). Yes, I know SSD is much faster, but to be honest; a HDD isn't a bum for me. I'm not in a hurry when I start up my PC, and currently it takes +/- 1 minute to start up and use Windows. I barely use Photoshop software, and I mainly use my PC for gaming. And if I'm correct, a SSD doesn't make gaming faster, only loading/saving (which is fine on my PC, goes fast enough for me).

So I've looked into HDD, but I'm not sure which brand, RPM etc is best to use. If I'm correct, my current HDD has 7200 RPM (highest/one of the highest RPM'S for HDD, right?), so if I take a HDD I can use it as a slave instead of master, no extra bonus for swapping Windows.

I'm currently looking at;

- Seagate Barracuda SSHD - 2TB - 8GB Hybrid --> +/- €106,-
- Seagate Barracuda - 3TB --> +/- €109,-
- Western Digital Black - 2TB --> +/- €133,-
- Western Digital Green - 3TB --> +/- €109,-

So the Seagate Barracude SSHD got 7200 RPM a 8GB SSHD cache, not that much and I wonder how this works.. I play a lot of Football Manager so maybe that cache would be enough for making saving/loading a bit faster (don't know why, but this years edition of FM is really slow in that). But that's the only reason why I put it on my list.

Seagate Barracuda 3TB is, I guess, the same as I got now, 7200 RPM, but with more space.

====== I've looked up on Seagate, and although I personally always had Seagate and 0 problems, it looks like a lot of people do got problems with this brand. Is it really a poor/not the best of brands? ======

The Western Digital Black, apparently a gaming HDD. I would transfer all my games + Steam to it, but I've read a lot of noise complaints. My current HDD does makes noise now and then, but most of the time, also through gaming most of the time, it's completely silent/makes a tiny bit of noise. Just the way I like it. A bit noise now and then doesn't concern me, but if anyone knows this black edition of Western makes not a bit but a lot of noise, even through gaming, I guess I rather pass this one.

The Western Digital Green. Looks fine, enough space, nothing special. Apparently 5400 RPM and 150 MB/s read/wright speed. So that would make it the slowest one of my list. Don't know much about this brand either.


So, what would u recommend for me?
Thanks for taking the time of reading and answering it =)

 

[geofelt]

From a reliability point of view, the 2tb WD drives are probably the best.
Here is an older report:
http://www.behardware.com/articles/881-6/components-returns-rates-7.html

Do yourself a favor and buy a ssd for the "C" drive. You will never go back. It makes everything you do so much quicker.
240gb is fine, but go 500gb if your budget permits.
Samsung 840/850 and Intel 730 would be my picks.
Samsung has a nice free migration tool you might be able to use.
Games do get help from a ssd, not only on level loads. Checkpoints go faster.
Consider the source, but here is an assertion that a ssd can actually help FPS:
http://www.samsung.com/global/business/semiconductor/minisite/SSD/global/html/why/forGamer.html

 

[aerocool]

I have 4 WD green 1TB and 1 WD green 2TB in may PC. They are very silent, when reading/writing, I almost not notice they are working... very silent HDD. The 3TB don´t know, but I think it will be silent too. Don´t know the new Seagate HDD, but my old Seagate were some noisy.

In terms of speed, I don´t think you will notice the different loading times from one HDD to another, in real life works (or gamming) all the HDD are slow. Time ago I had a RAID speed, and don´t notice anything faster (in theory it has to be almost twice the speed), the Windows load in almost the same time.

WD and Seagate have more or less the same quality, I have had some Seagate and only 1 broken after some years.

I don´t know how well and fast work the hybrid, but my preference is one SSD and one HDD.

PD: Sorry my poor english. 😉

 

[JordyB]

@ geofelt
Thanks for recommending a brand. But I do got a problem with those 2 on my list; the black one makes apparently a lot of noise, someone with experience maybe? And the green one 5400 RPM, do u think I notice a lot of difference between a 5400 RPM HDD and a 7200 RPM? Also when I put games on that 5400 RPM HDD?

And I know SSD is better/faster, no noise. But I really need at least 2TB space, also to save my files on my dying external HDD. So a SSD will eventually come, but for now it's too expansive to buy several only because I need the space.

@aerocool

Thanks for your opinion! So your recommendation would be the WD Green?

 

[boosted1g]

Green series drives are 5900 RPM, standard drives are 7200 rpm, some high end drives are 10000 rpm.
For opening files a 5900 rpm wont make much of a difference bur for a boot drive It will be quite noticeable.

What most of us do is have an SSD drive for the OS drive and programs. This makes a huge difference in performance. Most of have the 120 or 240 gb versions, Samsung is the preferred. We then have a normal HDD for mass storage of whatever else we need.

You also don't want to just have 1 massive drive in your computer. It is better to have 1 1tb drive and 1 2tb drive over a single 3 tb drive. If you have just one drive you put all your eggs into one basket so if that drive fails you loose everything.

What is your max budget you can spend, and how much of your 1tb drive is programs vs files?

 

[geofelt]

If a hdd is used for storage, I would have no problem with a WD green.
They take a bit of time to spin up which is a problem for an os which does a large number of small read/writes. A task that a ssd excels at(50x faster).
But for simple sequential of storage of large files such as video files, it is a good choice.

If noise is a concern, do some research at www.silentpcreview.com.

You could probably use a quieter case.
http://www.silentpcreview.com/article75-page5.html

 

[JordyB]

@boosted1g

Thanks for your opinion & explanation. I don't really have a budget, it's more a ''max what I want to spent on it''. I think a 256GB SSD would be enough for my programs and OS. Games I would install on a HDD, because I like to play a lot of different games, and currently steammap has almost 400GB of usage, without counting mods and Origin. And 1/2TB SSD is too much for me, I don't want to spent that kind of money on storage =)

I see that the 2TB WD Green is €85,-. I guess I take that one. I save a little bit of money which I can use on a SSD and with that I would have a 1TB and a 2TB HDD, enough for my games and crap. And then use the SSD for OS and most programs.

@geofelt
Thanks again for your answer. Really appreciate it!
It's mainly for storage, but also for installing some games on it to keep main HDD somewhat cleaner.

But I think I'm going for the WD Green 2TB, so I have some extra bucks to spend on a SSD. You recommend Samsung/Intel, how about Crucial? It looks more budget wise with good performance.

 

[geofelt]

Do not be much swayed by vendor synthetic SSD benchmarks.
They are done with apps that push the SSD to it's maximum using queue lengths of 30 or so.
Most desktop users will do one or two things at a time, so they will see queue lengths of one or two.
What really counts is the response times, particularly for small random I/O. That is what the os does mostly.
For that, the response times of current SSD's are remarkably similar. And quick. They will be 50X faster than a hard drive.
In sequential operations, they will be 2x faster than a hard drive, perhaps 3x if you have a sata3 interface.
Larger SSD's are preferable. They have more nand chips that can be accessed in parallel. Sort of an internal raid-0 if you will.
Also, a SSD will slow down as it approaches full. That is because it will have a harder time finding free nand blocks to do an update without a read/write operation.

As to brands, Crucial MX100 might be my third pick.
I like Samsung for the data migration utility.
I use it to clone my production ssd to a backup that I KNOW will work without a destructive test of backup/restore.
Samsung has a "rapid mode" software option that can use their ssd as a hard drive cache. That might be useful to you; read up on it.
Past that, intel and Samsung are in control of all components and can do a better job of validating their products.

 

[JordyB]

Thanks again for your time and answer, geofelt =)

I've ended up with ordering the Seagate 2TB, found a shop who was selling it for €76,90, and figured out that I soon will order a SSD so the lower the price for that HDD, the better.

I've found the Crucial MX100 256GB for roughly €100,-. Intel and Samsung will be a bit better/faster, but they also wear a bigger price tag. And I think that the Crucial will be fast enough for me. So the crucial looks way more interesting. I'm now wondering however, if the 256GB is big enough, or that it would be better if I wait a couple of months, let the price drop a bit more and buy a bigger (500GB) one. What would u suggest? I only install the OS and the main software I use on the SSD, games etc. I store on my HDD.

Edit: Found Samsung 840 EVO 250GB for €115, the Samsung 850 EVO 250GB for €120. Is the 850 worth the €5,- extra?

And yes, that rapid mode sounds wonderful =P

Edit2:Well, I've bought the Samsung 850 EVO 250GB today, also got my HDD deliverd.

Thanks for all the help!