• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Performance with new WD Blue.

Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
1,485 (0.88/day)
Likes
696
#1
Building a system with a new WD Blue 1TB 72k 64MBb drive. The normal surface tests I do usually start with drives getting about 145MB to 140MB per second and as it gets to the end of the drive, which would be the inside tracks, it drops down into the 100MB to 95MB range. But with this drive, it started at 178MB per second and only dropped down to the 150MB to 145MB per second range. On the third run and the results are the same. The system used to "break-in" drives has not changed in over two years.

That said, has anyone else had a similar experience? And has WD changed there design/manufacturing methods to increase performance? I'm not finding anything solid through search, either through Google or Bing(ick! Felt dirty even using it).
 

crazyeyesreaper

Chief Broken Rig
Staff member
Joined
Mar 25, 2009
Messages
8,815 (2.70/day)
Likes
3,709
Location
04578
#2
Its simply tech advancing forward. Look at a 500gb drive from a decade ago vs today. Its nearly twice as fast. I have an old WD Black 500gb first gen drive gets like 70 mb/s same drives today get nearly double.

Disc data density along with faster cache has resulted in incremental improvements that leads to the HDD speeds we see today. Sadly 4k read and writes are still garbage which is why SSDs feel so much faster.

That said performance varies more due to quality standards having dropped after the Tsunami a number of years ago.
 
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
1,485 (0.88/day)
Likes
696
#3
Its simply tech advancing forward. Look at a 500gb drive from a decade ago vs today. Its nearly twice as fast. I have an old WD Black 500gb first gen drive gets like 70 mb/s same drives today get nearly double. Disc data density along with faster cache has resulted in incremental improvements that leads to the HDD speeds we see today. Sadly 4k read and writes are still garbage which is why SSDs feel so much faster. That said performance varies more due to quality standards having dropped after the Tsunami a number of years ago.
But 30MB to 40MB per second in a single model line up? I'm on drive number 2 with the same new performance level. I'm wondering what WD has done to bump it up that much.
 
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
2,465 (1.16/day)
Likes
1,372
#4
Well the cache and seek performance was increased across the blue/blacks awhile ago 2012-13. They also started using less platters. I believe the WD10EZEX blue was one the first to be updated back in 2012.
 
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
10,340 (3.49/day)
Likes
6,995
Location
Oregon
System Name Delta // Alpha-HTPC
Processor Intel i7 6700K // Intel i5 4570
Motherboard GIGABYTE Z270X-Gaming K7 // Gigabyte H97M -D3H
Cooling Corsair H80i V2 // Silverstone NT-06 Pro
Memory Corsair DDR4 3000 32gb //G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 8GB 1600
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX980ti// EVGA GTX 1050ti
Storage Samsung 950 Pro 512, 2 Tb FireCuda// Samsung 850 Pro, Synology NAS with 2X Toshiba 6Tb
Display(s) ASUS PB278Q 27" 1440X 2560 // 50" Samsung Plasma 720p
Case Corsair Obsidian Series 550D // Silverstone Granada GD05
Audio Device(s) ASUS Xonar DGX // HDMI to Yamaha RX V571
Power Supply Corsair TX850M // SeaSonic G Series 550w
Mouse Logitech G502
Keyboard Corsair K70
Software Windows 10 64bit // Windows 7 64bit with Kodi
#5
I used a WD10EZEX for a couple of years. Just got rid of it, never tested the speed but I never had any issues with it. And I was constantly moving large videos back and forth from an SSD
 
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
2,465 (1.16/day)
Likes
1,372
#6
I used a WD10EZEX for a couple of years. Just got rid of it, never tested the speed but I never had any issues with it. And I was constantly moving large videos back and forth from an SSD
The only thing i hate about blues is there too cheap. Some time 40% below equal Blacks and for non-essentials its too tempting.

Although they are too loud for my taste. Blacks are much quieter now.
 
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
1,485 (0.88/day)
Likes
696
#7
Well the cache and seek performance was increased across the blue/blacks awhile ago 2012-13. They also started using less platters. I believe the WD10EZEX blue was one the first to be updated back in 2012.
I'm a system builder. This has just been over the past few weeks. The drives in question are in the exact same box with the same model number. The chassis and PCB look the same. Thus my surprise. The only thing that is different, that I can tell, is the firmware of the drives, but even that is only off by one number.
Although they are too loud for my taste. Blacks are much quieter now.
They're all almost dead quiet now.

Just put in a drive from my last shipment and it's testing out at the previous level of performance. The newer drives definitely have something new to them.
 
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
2,465 (1.16/day)
Likes
1,372
#8
I'm a system builder. This has just been over the past few weeks. The drives in question are in the exact same box with the same model number. The chassis and PCB look the same. Thus my surprise. The only thing that is different, that I can tell, is the firmware of the drives, but even that is only off by one number.

They're all almost dead quiet now.

Just put in a drive from my last shipment and it's testing out at the previous level of performance. The newer drives definitely have something new to them.
I bought a Blue retail package (Different SKU but it comes with a WD10EZEX) around 4 months ago. Funny enough it was to replace a WD10EZEX that was going bad. They still make seeking and spin up noises when you put large files on them. Not as much as before. But not quiet at all. The Blacks I have are almost silent. Cant hear them unless you take the cases apart.
 
Joined
Mar 26, 2010
Messages
7,695 (2.66/day)
Likes
2,003
Location
Jakarta, Indonesia
System Name micropage7
Processor Intel G4400
Motherboard MSI B150M Bazooka D3
Cooling Stock ( Lapped )
Memory 16 Gb Team Xtreem DDR3
Video Card(s) Nvidia GTX460
Storage Seagate 1 TB, 5oo Gb and SSD A-Data 128 Gb
Display(s) LG 19 inch LCD Wide Screen
Case HP dx6120 MT
Audio Device(s) Stock
Power Supply Be Quiet 600 Watt
Software Windows 7 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Classified
#9
have you check how it sounds? normal or something that may lead to faulty
have you tried to change the sata cable or another sata port, just to make sure its the HDD
i have bad experience with WD blue
got 3 dead just about one year
 
Joined
Nov 30, 2015
Messages
345 (0.42/day)
Likes
352
Location
Croatia
System Name Hallowed Be Thy Name
Processor FX-6300 @4,0 GHz/ i3-2100 @3,1 GHz
Motherboard ASUS M5A97 EVO R2.0/ Gigabyte GA-B75M-D3H
Cooling Enermax ETS-T40-TB /w Akasa Viper/ Stock
Memory 2x4 GB G.Skill Ares @1600 MHz/ 2x4 GB Adata @1333 MHz
Video Card(s) EVGA FTW GTX1050Ti 4GB/ Palit GTX750Ti StormX OC 2GB
Storage Seagate 500 GB 7200 rpm/ WD Blue 160 GB 7200 rpm
Display(s) LG 23MP68VQ-P/ ASUS VW190DE
Case Zalman Z3 Plus /w 5x Scythe Glidestream 1400 rpm/ Deepcool Smarter
Audio Device(s) Onboard x2
Power Supply OCZ ZS 550W / FSP Hexa+ 400W
Mouse Sharkoon Shark Force / Microsoft WMO 1.1A
Keyboard Lenovo SK-8825 / Keytronic KT600
Software W7 Ultimate 64-bit/ W7 Pro 64-bit
#10
I was looking to upgrade to this drive, my old WD is really really loud, and just 160GB. And that performance difference is huge compared to my old one.
 
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
10,340 (3.49/day)
Likes
6,995
Location
Oregon
System Name Delta // Alpha-HTPC
Processor Intel i7 6700K // Intel i5 4570
Motherboard GIGABYTE Z270X-Gaming K7 // Gigabyte H97M -D3H
Cooling Corsair H80i V2 // Silverstone NT-06 Pro
Memory Corsair DDR4 3000 32gb //G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 8GB 1600
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX980ti// EVGA GTX 1050ti
Storage Samsung 950 Pro 512, 2 Tb FireCuda// Samsung 850 Pro, Synology NAS with 2X Toshiba 6Tb
Display(s) ASUS PB278Q 27" 1440X 2560 // 50" Samsung Plasma 720p
Case Corsair Obsidian Series 550D // Silverstone Granada GD05
Audio Device(s) ASUS Xonar DGX // HDMI to Yamaha RX V571
Power Supply Corsair TX850M // SeaSonic G Series 550w
Mouse Logitech G502
Keyboard Corsair K70
Software Windows 10 64bit // Windows 7 64bit with Kodi
#11
My blues were silent. At least compared to my Enterprise drives. Blacks are overrated, I mean there nice but way overpriced. If you can get them at a good price then great. I've owned a few over the years. All are about the same speed. 90 to 160 depending on the file sizes. A bunch of small files will transfer slower
 
Joined
Feb 8, 2012
Messages
2,733 (1.24/day)
Likes
1,962
Location
Zagreb, Croatia
System Name Windows 7 64-bit Core i5 3570K
Processor Intel Core i5 3570K @ 4.2 GHz, 1.26 V
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-Z77MX-D3H
Cooling Scythe Katana 4
Memory 4 x 4 GB G-Skill Sniper DDR3 @ 1600 MHz
Video Card(s) Gainward NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 Phantom
Storage Western Digital Caviar Blue 1 TB, Seagate Baracuda 1 TB
Display(s) Dell P2414H
Case CoolerMaster Silencio 550
Audio Device(s) VIA HD Audio
Power Supply Corsair TX v2 650W
Mouse Steelseries Sensei
Keyboard CM Storm Quickfire Pro, Cherry MX Reds
Software MS Windows 7 Enterprise 64-bit SP1
#12
I got 1 TB WD Blue also and have same numbers ... here's comparison with my other drive (1TB Seagate Baracuda):
my-hdd.png
hdd1.png hdd2.png
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2005
Messages
4,147 (0.92/day)
Likes
1,944
Location
USA
System Name Small ATX Desktop
Processor Intel i5 8600K / 4.8 GHz @ 1.2V
Motherboard Asrock Z370 Taichi
Cooling PHTC12DX CPU + MK-13 VGA, Fans: 2x Delta EFB1212VH, 3x Yate Loon D14BH-12
Memory G-Skill TridentZ 2X8GB DDR4 3200 CL14 F4-3200C14D-16GTZ
Video Card(s) PNY Geforce GTX 770 XLR8 2GB
Storage Seagate 600 240GB SSD + 2xWD Caviar Blue WD10EZEX 1TB Data
Display(s) Asus PB258Q 2560x1440 + Asus VH242H 1920x1080
Case Lian Li PC A05NB (Inverted Mobo)
Audio Device(s) Audiotechnica ATH M50X, Antlion Mod Mic 4, SYBA SD-CM-UAUD
Power Supply Seasonic SS-660XP2 660 Watt Platinum
Mouse Zowie EC2A Mouse, Microsoft Basic Optical Mouse, Corsair MM600, Inateck 900x300 mouse mat
Keyboard Filco Majestouch II Ninja TKL, Goldtouch GTC 0033 Ten Key
Software Win7 Pro 64 (Installed on Coffee Lake using PS/2 Emulation mode)
#13
Well the cache and seek performance was increased across the blue/blacks awhile ago 2012-13. They also started using less platters. I believe the WD10EZEX blue was one the first to be updated back in 2012.
The WD Blue WD10EZEX was slightly faster than the Black model.
I had 3 blues EZEX but gave one away, I still use two of them and they are very fast.

Then in 2015 they made the Greens the new Blue. Avoid the 5400 RPM ones if you can.
source: https://techreport.com/news/29251/western-digital-paints-its-green-hard-drives-blue-in-rebranding
http://hdd.userbenchmark.com/Compare/WD-Blue-1TB-2012-vs-WD-Black-1TB-2013/1779vs1822
 

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
24,576 (5.49/day)
Likes
10,769
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 8700K@4.8GHz(Quick and dirty)
Motherboard AsRock Z370 Taichi
Cooling Corsair H110i GTX
Memory 32GB Corsair DDR4-3000
Video Card(s) PNY XLR8 GTX1060 6GB
Storage 480GB Crucial MX200 + 2TB Seagate Solid State Hybrid Drive with 128GB OCZ Synapse SSD Cache
Display(s) QNIX QX2710 1440p@120Hz
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply Corsair HX850
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
#14
I'm a system builder. This has just been over the past few weeks. The drives in question are in the exact same box with the same model number. The chassis and PCB look the same. Thus my surprise. The only thing that is different, that I can tell, is the firmware of the drives, but even that is only off by one number.
The recently upped their platter density. That is why the performance numbers went up. Up until recently I believe they were using two 500GB platters in the WD Blues, and they have now switch to a single 1TB platter.
 
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
1,485 (0.88/day)
Likes
696
#15
The recently upped their platter density. That is why the performance numbers went up. Up until recently I believe they were using two 500GB platters in the WD Blues, and they have now switch to a single 1TB platter.
Thought of that, but the chassis's for the slower and faster drive are identical. The manufacture dates are only two months apart, the slower one is Aug and the faster is Oct.
 
Joined
Feb 8, 2012
Messages
2,733 (1.24/day)
Likes
1,962
Location
Zagreb, Croatia
System Name Windows 7 64-bit Core i5 3570K
Processor Intel Core i5 3570K @ 4.2 GHz, 1.26 V
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-Z77MX-D3H
Cooling Scythe Katana 4
Memory 4 x 4 GB G-Skill Sniper DDR3 @ 1600 MHz
Video Card(s) Gainward NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 Phantom
Storage Western Digital Caviar Blue 1 TB, Seagate Baracuda 1 TB
Display(s) Dell P2414H
Case CoolerMaster Silencio 550
Audio Device(s) VIA HD Audio
Power Supply Corsair TX v2 650W
Mouse Steelseries Sensei
Keyboard CM Storm Quickfire Pro, Cherry MX Reds
Software MS Windows 7 Enterprise 64-bit SP1
#17

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
24,576 (5.49/day)
Likes
10,769
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 8700K@4.8GHz(Quick and dirty)
Motherboard AsRock Z370 Taichi
Cooling Corsair H110i GTX
Memory 32GB Corsair DDR4-3000
Video Card(s) PNY XLR8 GTX1060 6GB
Storage 480GB Crucial MX200 + 2TB Seagate Solid State Hybrid Drive with 128GB OCZ Synapse SSD Cache
Display(s) QNIX QX2710 1440p@120Hz
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply Corsair HX850
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
#18
Thought of that, but the chassis's for the slower and faster drive are identical. The manufacture dates are only two months apart, the slower one is Aug and the faster is Oct.
On the outside they will look identical, all the changes are internal.
 
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
791 (0.25/day)
Likes
411
Location
austria
Processor 2500k
Motherboard ud4
Cooling water
Memory 4gb
Video Card(s) 560ti
Power Supply 300sfx
#19
and watch out the bench software itself is not compareable with version 5.2.1 and 6.0.0.
sequentiell test gives 100\150mb\s difference to the 4KiBQ32T1 test.
rest stays the same
 
Joined
Mar 18, 2015
Messages
196 (0.18/day)
Likes
104
#23
Over the years a mechanical drive was typically half as fast on the inside edge of the platter as the outside. Personally I was never a fan of the Blue. Benchmarks are a great tool is ya spend each and every day copying entire HDs from one ot another. But I prefer to use application based tools which tell a different story. If I used a WD HD, it would usually be a black. If ya look at the THZG test charts, bit out of date now, in gaming the Black came in at 6.45 MB/s in gaming, while the Blue came in at 4.01 MB/s. The black's 5 year warranty also was a big advanatge over the Blue's 2 year. However we stopped using HDs 7 years ago... each build now contains an SSD for OS and programs and an SSHD for data or gaming as the case may be. By comparison, the SSD scored 9.76 MB/sec in those tests. have installed 20+ SSHds in last 7 years with 0 failures to date and quarterly testing shows full health.

The average failure rate by brand is oft bandied about but this suffers much from completely irrelevant server testing by backblaze (where protection features of consumer drives actually accelerate failure in server applications) and like anything else it's not about "the brand" it's about the model. Both change year to year and even 6 month testing period to testing period. Average RMA rates by brand foer the last two testing periods (12 months) are:

HGST = 0.97%
Seagate =0.83%
Toshiba = 0.93%
Western = 1.15%

This pales in significance compared to individual models which have RMA rates up to 10% Faster rpm and larger drive models, as expected, have higher rates. For example the 3TB WD Black 3 TB has a current 6 month failure rate of 5.08% while the 2 TB is just over a quarter of that. Also there are slight differences between model designs. The Seagate BarraCuda 2 TBo (ST2000DM006) had a RMA rate of 0.79% whereas the Seagate BarraCuda 2 TB (ST2000LM015) had a RMA rate of 1,47%. Averaging popular models over the last two 6 month reporting periods...(1 TB wasn't broken out).

1.34% = WD Blue 2 TB (2 yr warranty)
1.02% = Seagate BarraCuda 2 TB (2 yr warranty)

0.95% = Seagate Desktop SSHD 2 TB (5 yr warranty)
0.90% = WD Black 2 TB (5 yr warranty)

Point I am getting at is the things that benchmarks tell me are generally not performed on a daily basis and therefore not relevant to selection or what you need to worry about when troubleshooting. If you use the box primarily for gaming, then those gaming test results would all I'd be concerned about. My box is used 9 - 5 as a CAD Workstation and SOHO file server ... the SSHDs 8 GB hybrid SSD performs well here as whatever files are frequently used are stored there. As a gaming box, if you the type of gamer who polayes one or two games ata atime, you will also benefit from an SSHD.... if like my youngest son, who plays 4 or 5 games per nite and often different ones each day, any performance gain is lost.

In short, when having performance concerns whether for selection or troubleshooting, my suggestion is to base yoiur investigations on applications benchmarks... applications which you actually use and representing what you normally do. One caveat ... Office suite type benchmarks which contain scriots perfoming a sequence of hundreds of individual actions are meaningless. A user has to press 1 or more keys between each of those actions and these render any script useless since the user is the bottleneck.

by You may have to pay 50% more for the 5 year warranty drives nut failure rate is 34% better (BTW, that's just between 6 and 12 months of operation.
 
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
1,485 (0.88/day)
Likes
696
#24
I have multiple drives here with varying platter densities outside shells are the same. Granted they are Samsung HDDs
Took a picture to show the difference.
IMG_20180124_103350.jpg

The drive on the left is a single platter WD, the new one I've been talking about. The one on the right is also a WD, is the same 1TB capacity, but is the dual platter configuration newtekie1 mentioned above. The one on the left is more recessed.
 

crazyeyesreaper

Chief Broken Rig
Staff member
Joined
Mar 25, 2009
Messages
8,815 (2.70/day)
Likes
3,709
Location
04578
#25
Well either way single plater vs dual platter is why performance has changed. Interesting to see WD changed the shell. But its just a shell.