[SOLVED] Which 4TB HDD is right for me? Seagate BarraCuda ST4000DM004 or Western Digital Blue WD40EZRZ?

[Maalikm]

I have been gathering parts for my upcoming PC build for a while now, and its now time for me to decide on an HDD for general desktop PC data storage.
I found my sweet spot for capacity to be 4TB, and two equally priced candidates are competing for my wallet:

• The Seagate BarraCuda ST4000DM004 (https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07D9C7SQH/ref=twister_B08M9YPM2Q?_encoding=UTF8&th=1)
• The Western Digital Blue WD40EZRZ (https://www.amazon.com/WD-Blue-2TB-Hard-Drive/dp/B013HNYV8I/ref=psdc_1254762011_t1_B07D9C7SQH?th=1)

Any irreplaceable data will of course be backed up to an external drive on a regular basis, but which of these two drives should I expect to be more reliable?

Which of these two drives could I expect to faster/more responsive? Does the Seagate's 256MB of cache (against the WD's 64MB) make it the clear winner?

Do either of these drives have any unique advantages or issues that I need to consider?

Simple google searches and Amazon reviews have come up with a disappointingly sparse amount of good information, so I turn to you guys for help.
Which of these 4TB drives is the right choice for me? Thanks in advance for any advice y'all can give!

 

[Tfo052]

Hello, I would very strongly recommend Western Digital as Seagate's reliability in my experience of working with many computers (100's) is very bad. Also when seagate drives die, they tend to die very fast and click or have head crashes which are unrecoverable without sending it to a special company for hundreds of dollars. Western digital drives last many year longer in my experience and when they do get close to dying, they will usually give warning signs (very slow and occasional miss read file or corrupt file). Western digital drives are also the same speed or sometimes faster but there wont be much speed difference between them. Backblaze (a data storage company) has shown for many years that Seagate HDD's have far worse failure rates than other brands of HDD's.

 

[USAFRet]

What other drives will be in this system?
Specifically, SSD.

As a counterpoint to the above, the only HDD I've had die recently was a WD.

 

[Maalikm]

Hello, I would very strongly recommend Western Digital as Seagate's reliability in my experience of working with many computers (100's) is very bad. Also when seagate drives die, they tend to die very fast and click or have head crashes which are unrecoverable without sending it to a special company for hundreds of dollars. Western digital drives last many year longer in my experience and when they do get close to dying, they will usually give warning signs (very slow and occasional miss read file or corrupt file). Western digital drives are also the same speed or sometimes faster but there wont be much speed difference between them. Backblaze (a data storage company) has shown for many years that Seagate HDD's have far worse failure rates than other brands of HDD's.

Thanks, I also just realized that the Seagate is an SMR drive, so its a no-go for me anyways. Look's like I'm getting the WD.

 

[Maalikm]

What other drives will be in this system?
Specifically, SSD.

As a counterpoint to the above, the only HDD I've had die recently was a WD.

I'm also throwing's in a 2TB 970 Evo Plus as a boot drive.

I'm probably gonna go with the W.D. anyways because it isn't an SMR drive unlike the Seagate.

 

[nofanneeded]

I'm also throwing's in a 2TB 970 Evo Plus as a boot drive.

I'm probably gonna go with the W.D. anyways because it isn't an SMR drive unlike the Seagate.

Look for WD with 256 MB cache they exist