Seagate Barracuda Pro vs Seagate Firecuda vs Crucial MX500 Mostly for Gaming

[damcatic]

My laptop has an SSD which is where the OS and other apps are, I have a spare SATA slot and I want to get a new drive which is mostly going to be for games. I have a fairly low budget so I'm not sure which one to go for between the Barracuda Pro 1tb, the Firecuda 1tb (if it makes any difference) and the Crucial MX500 500gb SSD. If anyone knows any other good HDD options, if I should save up for a 1tb SSD, or any other contributions would be appreciated. Thank you.

 

[jankerson]

Out of those the Crucial MX500GB SSD by far will be the best choice for games.

The Samsung 860 EVO 500GB SSD is also an excellent choice and on sale now.

 

[damcatic]

Out of those the Crucial MX500GB SSD by far will be the best choice for games.

The Samsung 860 EVO 500GB SSD is also an excellent choice and on sale now.

Does having an SSD make a difference in game load times. Also, will the WD Black 1tb be a better option because when I'm done installing all the games, I would have roughly 15gb free out of the mx500

 

[jankerson]

Out of those the Crucial MX500GB SSD by far will be the best choice for games.

The Samsung 860 EVO 500GB SSD is also an excellent choice and on sale now.

Does having an SSD make a difference in game load times. Also, will the WD Black 1tb be a better option because when I'm done installing all the games, I would have roughly 15gb free out of the mx500

BIG DIFFERENCE.

You likely want to get a GOOD HIGH QUALITY SSD like the Crucial MX 500 or Samsung 860 (850) EVO, only two I would recommend.

If you have that much space in games save up for a 1TB SSD, one of the two above.

Quality DOES make a difference.

 

[enforcerdestroyer]

I think you should go for the Firecuda 1TB. If you are not planning on installing many games (or are fine with uninstalling games occasionally), go for the Crucial MX500 500GB SSD. I'm using a Barracuda 2TB 7200rpm, haven't had any long loading issues. While the SSD does provide a difference in loading times/speed, I honestly didn't find it as significant as others may say. I think I can wait an extra 3-5 seconds (depending on the game, could be a bigger difference). With a firecuda, I'm sure the difference will be even less noticeable, depending on what you play again.

 

[jankerson]

I think you should go for the Firecuda 1TB. If you are not planning on installing many games (or are fine with uninstalling games occasionally), go for the Crucial MX500 500GB SSD. I'm using a Barracuda 2TB 7200rpm, haven't had any long loading issues. While the SSD does provide a difference in loading times/speed, I honestly didn't find it as significant as others may say. I think I can wait an extra 3-5 seconds (depending on the game, could be a bigger difference). With a firecuda, I'm sure the difference will be even less noticeable, depending on what you play again.

It can be and is depending on what the actual games are, the difference can be huge.

Those Firecudas really aren't all that fast, an SSD is a much better buy.

 

[damcatic]

I think you should go for the Firecuda 1TB. If you are not planning on installing many games (or are fine with uninstalling games occasionally), go for the Crucial MX500 500GB SSD. I'm using a Barracuda 2TB 7200rpm, haven't had any long loading issues. While the SSD does provide a difference in loading times/speed, I honestly didn't find it as significant as others may say. I think I can wait an extra 3-5 seconds (depending on the game, could be a bigger difference). With a firecuda, I'm sure the difference will be even less noticeable, depending on what you play again.

I'm planning on installing games like Wolfenstein the new order and the old blood, Mortal Kombat X, stuffs like assassin's creed 1-4, far cry 3 and 4, GTA 4, mainly fairly large games which is why I was considering the firecuda and the WD black. But if the performance loss as compared to the mx500 is going to be large, I might as well stick with uninstalling games I've played already.

 

[enforcerdestroyer]

I think you should go for the Firecuda 1TB. If you are not planning on installing many games (or are fine with uninstalling games occasionally), go for the Crucial MX500 500GB SSD. I'm using a Barracuda 2TB 7200rpm, haven't had any long loading issues. While the SSD does provide a difference in loading times/speed, I honestly didn't find it as significant as others may say. I think I can wait an extra 3-5 seconds (depending on the game, could be a bigger difference). With a firecuda, I'm sure the difference will be even less noticeable, depending on what you play again.

I'm planning on installing games like Wolfenstein the new order and the old blood, Mortal Kombat X, stuffs like assassin's creed 1-4, far cry 3 and 4, GTA 4, mainly fairly large games which is why I was considering the firecuda and the WD black. But if the performance loss as compared to the mx500 is going to be large, I might as well stick with uninstalling games I've played already.

Yeah, those games are fairly large. I've played all of them except MKX and the AC games (played AC: Origins instead), they worked just fine with my 7200rpm drive, no performance loss, loading is just a little longer than it would be with an SSD. But I think 5-15 sec loading is just fine. Either way, go for whatever fits you most. If you prefer shaving off a few seconds loading, go for the SSD, if you can wait a few more seconds, go for the HDD.

 

[jankerson]

I think you should go for the Firecuda 1TB. If you are not planning on installing many games (or are fine with uninstalling games occasionally), go for the Crucial MX500 500GB SSD. I'm using a Barracuda 2TB 7200rpm, haven't had any long loading issues. While the SSD does provide a difference in loading times/speed, I honestly didn't find it as significant as others may say. I think I can wait an extra 3-5 seconds (depending on the game, could be a bigger difference). With a firecuda, I'm sure the difference will be even less noticeable, depending on what you play again.

I'm planning on installing games like Wolfenstein the new order and the old blood, Mortal Kombat X, stuffs like assassin's creed 1-4, far cry 3 and 4, GTA 4, mainly fairly large games which is why I was considering the firecuda and the WD black. But if the performance loss as compared to the mx500 is going to be large, I might as well stick with uninstalling games I've played already.

I have ran games off both 7200 rpm HD's and SSD and I can tell you for sure the SSD is worth it.

I play Far Cry 5, Rise Of the Tomb Raider, Fallout 4, and GTA 5 currently.

We aren't just talking about a few seconds difference here, the difference is massive. Had time to make a sandwich while some games load with the 7200 rpm HD.

Currently using a Samsung 860 EVO 500GB as my game drive and the difference is VERY noticeable to say the least.

 

[enforcerdestroyer]

I think you should go for the Firecuda 1TB. If you are not planning on installing many games (or are fine with uninstalling games occasionally), go for the Crucial MX500 500GB SSD. I'm using a Barracuda 2TB 7200rpm, haven't had any long loading issues. While the SSD does provide a difference in loading times/speed, I honestly didn't find it as significant as others may say. I think I can wait an extra 3-5 seconds (depending on the game, could be a bigger difference). With a firecuda, I'm sure the difference will be even less noticeable, depending on what you play again.

I'm planning on installing games like Wolfenstein the new order and the old blood, Mortal Kombat X, stuffs like assassin's creed 1-4, far cry 3 and 4, GTA 4, mainly fairly large games which is why I was considering the firecuda and the WD black. But if the performance loss as compared to the mx500 is going to be large, I might as well stick with uninstalling games I've played already.

I have ran games off both 7200 rpm HD's and SSD and I can tell you for sure the SSD is worth it.

I play Far Cry 5, Rise Of the Tomb Raider, Fallout 4, and GTA 5 currently.

We aren't just talking about a few seconds difference here, the difference is massive. Had time to make a sandwich while some games load with the 7200 rpm HD.

Currently using a Samsung 860 EVO 500GB as my game drive and the difference is VERY noticeable to say the least.

Well, I dunno then. The most I'd have time for is to run to the kitchen and pour a glass of water, and by the time I get the glass of water, my game is already loaded.

 

[jankerson]

I think you should go for the Firecuda 1TB. If you are not planning on installing many games (or are fine with uninstalling games occasionally), go for the Crucial MX500 500GB SSD. I'm using a Barracuda 2TB 7200rpm, haven't had any long loading issues. While the SSD does provide a difference in loading times/speed, I honestly didn't find it as significant as others may say. I think I can wait an extra 3-5 seconds (depending on the game, could be a bigger difference). With a firecuda, I'm sure the difference will be even less noticeable, depending on what you play again.

I'm planning on installing games like Wolfenstein the new order and the old blood, Mortal Kombat X, stuffs like assassin's creed 1-4, far cry 3 and 4, GTA 4, mainly fairly large games which is why I was considering the firecuda and the WD black. But if the performance loss as compared to the mx500 is going to be large, I might as well stick with uninstalling games I've played already.

I have ran games off both 7200 rpm HD's and SSD and I can tell you for sure the SSD is worth it.

I play Far Cry 5, Rise Of the Tomb Raider, Fallout 4, and GTA 5 currently.

We aren't just talking about a few seconds difference here, the difference is massive. Had time to make a sandwich while some games load with the 7200 rpm HD.

Currently using a Samsung 860 EVO 500GB as my game drive and the difference is VERY noticeable to say the least.

Well, I dunno then. The most I'd have time for is to run to the kitchen and pour a glass of water, and by the time I get the glass of water, my game is already loaded.

With the older games it wasn't too bad, but the new current ones that are rather large take time.

 

[enforcerdestroyer]

I think you should go for the Firecuda 1TB. If you are not planning on installing many games (or are fine with uninstalling games occasionally), go for the Crucial MX500 500GB SSD. I'm using a Barracuda 2TB 7200rpm, haven't had any long loading issues. While the SSD does provide a difference in loading times/speed, I honestly didn't find it as significant as others may say. I think I can wait an extra 3-5 seconds (depending on the game, could be a bigger difference). With a firecuda, I'm sure the difference will be even less noticeable, depending on what you play again.

I'm planning on installing games like Wolfenstein the new order and the old blood, Mortal Kombat X, stuffs like assassin's creed 1-4, far cry 3 and 4, GTA 4, mainly fairly large games which is why I was considering the firecuda and the WD black. But if the performance loss as compared to the mx500 is going to be large, I might as well stick with uninstalling games I've played already.

I have ran games off both 7200 rpm HD's and SSD and I can tell you for sure the SSD is worth it.

I play Far Cry 5, Rise Of the Tomb Raider, Fallout 4, and GTA 5 currently.

We aren't just talking about a few seconds difference here, the difference is massive. Had time to make a sandwich while some games load with the 7200 rpm HD.

Currently using a Samsung 860 EVO 500GB as my game drive and the difference is VERY noticeable to say the least.

Well, I dunno then. The most I'd have time for is to run to the kitchen and pour a glass of water, and by the time I get the glass of water, my game is already loaded.

With the older games it wasn't too bad, but the new current ones that are rather large take time.

Hmm, I guess you're right. The larger games do take a bit longer, like Shadow of War with a ~15 second load and AC Origins with a 17 second load time. SSDs are the better choice when it comes to speed, but I only really use it for 1 game and the OS, while my other 70 games are on the HDD. Either way, OP should get whatever suits him most, which is likely the SSD.

 

[jankerson]

I think you should go for the Firecuda 1TB. If you are not planning on installing many games (or are fine with uninstalling games occasionally), go for the Crucial MX500 500GB SSD. I'm using a Barracuda 2TB 7200rpm, haven't had any long loading issues. While the SSD does provide a difference in loading times/speed, I honestly didn't find it as significant as others may say. I think I can wait an extra 3-5 seconds (depending on the game, could be a bigger difference). With a firecuda, I'm sure the difference will be even less noticeable, depending on what you play again.

I'm planning on installing games like Wolfenstein the new order and the old blood, Mortal Kombat X, stuffs like assassin's creed 1-4, far cry 3 and 4, GTA 4, mainly fairly large games which is why I was considering the firecuda and the WD black. But if the performance loss as compared to the mx500 is going to be large, I might as well stick with uninstalling games I've played already.

I have ran games off both 7200 rpm HD's and SSD and I can tell you for sure the SSD is worth it.

I play Far Cry 5, Rise Of the Tomb Raider, Fallout 4, and GTA 5 currently.

We aren't just talking about a few seconds difference here, the difference is massive. Had time to make a sandwich while some games load with the 7200 rpm HD.

Currently using a Samsung 860 EVO 500GB as my game drive and the difference is VERY noticeable to say the least.

Well, I dunno then. The most I'd have time for is to run to the kitchen and pour a glass of water, and by the time I get the glass of water, my game is already loaded.

With the older games it wasn't too bad, but the new current ones that are rather large take time.

Hmm, I guess you're right. The larger games do take a bit longer, like Shadow of War with a ~15 second load and AC Origins with a 17 second load time. SSDs are the better choice when it comes to speed, but I only really use it for 1 game and the OS, while my other 70 games are on the HDD. Either way, OP should get whatever suits him most, which is likely the SSD.

I used my 7200 rpm HD until the prices on the larger SSD's finally came down, and it's not a slow HD either.

The games will only get bigger as time goes on, that's for sure.


I use a 960 EVO NVME M.2 as my OS drive then the 860 EVO for games now.

 

[seagate_surfer]

Hello damcatic, just wanted to share with you the specs and manual of the 2.5" BarraCuda Pro drive and the specs and manual of the FireCuda 2.5" drive. What is your budget? As this will determine which drive you will be looking at. The BarraCuda and FireCuda pages have links to retailers as well as other information that can help you in your quest.

Let us know if we can answer any questions; we're here to help. No matter what you choose, we thank you for considering Seagate.

 

[damcatic]

Hello damcatic, just wanted to share with you the specs and manual of the 2.5" BarraCuda Pro drive and the specs and manual of the FireCuda 2.5" drive. What is your budget? As this will determine which drive you will be looking at. The BarraCuda and FireCuda pages have links to retailers as well as other information that can help you in your quest.

Let us know if we can answer any questions; we're here to help. No matter what you choose, we thank you for considering Seagate.

Is there a real-life difference between the firecuda, barracuda and barracuda pro?

 

[damcatic]

Hello damcatic, just wanted to share with you the specs and manual of the 2.5" BarraCuda Pro drive and the specs and manual of the FireCuda 2.5" drive. What is your budget? As this will determine which drive you will be looking at. The BarraCuda and FireCuda pages have links to retailers as well as other information that can help you in your quest.

Let us know if we can answer any questions; we're here to help. No matter what you choose, we thank you for considering Seagate.

Is there a real-life difference between the firecuda, barracuda and barracuda pro?

 

[seagate_surfer]

Hello damcatic, yes there are difference between them all. Each drive is designed for different uses.

The Hybrid FireCuda combines the latest NAND flash technology with a traditional hard drive for a compact blend of capacity and speeds up to 5× faster than typical hard drives.

The BarraCuda Pro 7200-RPM hard drives are available in capacities up to 1TB and offer faster data rates up to 160MB/s, enabling a superior PC experience and snappier file transfers.

The BarraCuda has a versatile mix of capacity and price point options to fit any budget and comes with Multi-Tier Caching Technology for excellent hard drive performance.

Let us know if we can answer any questions; we're here to help.

 

[damcatic]

I ended up getting the mx500 ssd while it was on sale and im very happy with the choice. Thanks for all the assistance