• 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
25,559 (6.52/day)
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

Not a Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Mar 25, 2009
Messages
9,752 (1.78/day)
Location
04578
System Name Old reliable
Processor Intel 8700K @ 4.8 GHz
Motherboard MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC
Cooling Custom Water
Memory 32 GB Crucial Ballistix 3666 MHz
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1080 Ti Gaming X
Storage 3x SSDs 2x HDDs
Display(s) Dell U2412M + Samsung TA350
Case Thermaltake Core P3 TG
Audio Device(s) Samson Meteor Mic / Generic 2.1 / KRK KNS 6400 headset
Power Supply Zalman EBT-1000
Mouse Mionix NAOS 7000
Keyboard Mionix
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
25,559 (6.52/day)
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
3,881 (0.89/day)
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
12,280 (2.37/day)
Location
Oregon
System Name Juliette // HTPC
Processor Intel i7 9700K // AMD Ryzen 5 5600G
Motherboard ASUS Prime Z390X-A // ASRock B550 ITX-AC
Cooling Noctua NH-U12 Black // Stock
Memory Corsair DDR4 3600 32gb //G.SKILL Trident Z Royal Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 3600
Video Card(s) ASUS RTX4070 OC// GTX 1650
Storage Samsung 970 EVO NVMe 1Tb, Intel 665p Series M.2 2280 1TB // Samsung 1Tb SSD
Display(s) ASUS VP348QGL 34" Quad HD 3440 x 1440 // 55" LG 4K SK8000 Series
Case Seasonic SYNCRO Q7// Silverstone Granada GD05
Audio Device(s) Focusrite Scarlett 4i4 // HDMI to Samsung HW-R650 sound bar
Power Supply Seasonic SYNCRO 750 W // CORSAIR Vengeance 650M
Mouse Cooler Master MM710 53G
Keyboard Logitech 920-009300 G512 SE
Software Windows 10 Pro // Windows 10 Pro
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
3,881 (0.89/day)
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
25,559 (6.52/day)
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
3,881 (0.89/day)
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
9,762 (1.91/day)
Location
Jakarta, Indonesia
System Name micropage7
Processor Intel Xeon X3470
Motherboard Gigabyte Technology Co. Ltd. P55A-UD3R (Socket 1156)
Cooling Enermax ETS-T40F
Memory Samsung 8.00GB Dual-Channel DDR3
Video Card(s) NVIDIA Quadro FX 1800
Storage V-GEN03AS18EU120GB, Seagate 2 x 1TB and Seagate 4TB
Display(s) Samsung 21 inch LCD Wide Screen
Case Icute Super 18
Audio Device(s) Auzentech X-Fi Forte
Power Supply Silverstone 600 Watt
Mouse Logitech G502
Keyboard Sades Excalibur + Taihao keycaps
Software Win 7 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Classified
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
712 (0.23/day)
Location
Croatia
Processor Ryzen 5 3600 PRO
Motherboard AsRock B450 Pro4
Cooling Arctic Freezer 34 /w Noctua NF-P12
Memory Silicon Power XPower Zenith 2x8GB @1600 MHz
Video Card(s) Gigabyte RTX 2070 Super Gaming OC 8GB
Storage Crucial P5 Plus 1TB / Crucial MX 500 1TB
Display(s) Dell P2419H
Case Fractal Design Pop Air /w 3x Arctic P12 PWM
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound Blaster Z + Edifier R1000T4
Power Supply Super Flower Leadex III 650W
Mouse Microsoft Intelimouse Pro
Keyboard IBM KB-8926
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Turns on on the first try! Usually.
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
12,280 (2.37/day)
Location
Oregon
System Name Juliette // HTPC
Processor Intel i7 9700K // AMD Ryzen 5 5600G
Motherboard ASUS Prime Z390X-A // ASRock B550 ITX-AC
Cooling Noctua NH-U12 Black // Stock
Memory Corsair DDR4 3600 32gb //G.SKILL Trident Z Royal Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 3600
Video Card(s) ASUS RTX4070 OC// GTX 1650
Storage Samsung 970 EVO NVMe 1Tb, Intel 665p Series M.2 2280 1TB // Samsung 1Tb SSD
Display(s) ASUS VP348QGL 34" Quad HD 3440 x 1440 // 55" LG 4K SK8000 Series
Case Seasonic SYNCRO Q7// Silverstone Granada GD05
Audio Device(s) Focusrite Scarlett 4i4 // HDMI to Samsung HW-R650 sound bar
Power Supply Seasonic SYNCRO 750 W // CORSAIR Vengeance 650M
Mouse Cooler Master MM710 53G
Keyboard Logitech 920-009300 G512 SE
Software Windows 10 Pro // Windows 10 Pro
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
3,012 (0.68/day)
Location
Zagreb, Croatia
System Name Windows 10 64-bit Core i7 6700
Processor Intel Core i7 6700
Motherboard Asus Z170M-PLUS
Cooling Corsair AIO
Memory 2 x 8 GB Kingston DDR4 2666
Video Card(s) Gigabyte NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB
Storage Western Digital Caviar Blue 1 TB, Seagate Baracuda 1 TB
Display(s) Dell P2414H
Case Corsair Carbide Air 540
Audio Device(s) Realtek HD Audio
Power Supply Corsair TX v2 650W
Mouse Steelseries Sensei
Keyboard CM Storm Quickfire Pro, Cherry MX Reds
Software MS Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
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.pnghdd2.png
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2005
Messages
6,874 (1.02/day)
Location
USA
System Name Computer of Theseus
Processor Intel i9-12900KS: 50x Pcore multi @ 1.18Vcore (target 1.275V -100mv offset)
Motherboard EVGA Z690 Classified
Cooling Noctua NH-D15S, 2xThermalRight TY-143, 4xNoctua NF-A12x25,3xNF-A12x15, 2xAquacomputer Splitty9Active
Memory G-Skill Trident Z5 (32GB) DDR5-6000 C36 F5-6000J3636F16GX2-TZ5RK
Video Card(s) EVGA Geforce 3060 XC Black Gaming 12GB
Storage 1x Samsung 970 Pro 512GB NVMe (OS), 2x Samsung 970 Evo Plus 2TB (data 1 and 2), ASUS BW-16D1HT
Display(s) Dell S3220DGF 32" 2560x1440 165Hz Primary, Dell P2017H 19.5" 1600x900 Secondary, Ergotron LX arms.
Case Lian Li O11 Air Mini
Audio Device(s) Audiotechnica ATR2100X-USB, El Gato Wave XLR Mic Preamp, ATH M50X Headphones, Behringer 302USB Mixer
Power Supply Super Flower Leadex Platinum SE 1000W 80+ Platinum White
Mouse Zowie EC3-C
Keyboard Vortex Multix 87 Winter TKL (Gateron G Pro Yellow)
Software Win 10 LTSC 21H2
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
28,472 (4.25/day)
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 10850K@5.2GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z470 Taichi
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro w/ Noctua NF-A14 Fans
Memory 32GB DDR4-3600
Video Card(s) RTX 2070 Super
Storage 500GB SX8200 Pro + 8TB with 1TB SSD Cache
Display(s) Acer Nitro VG280K 4K 28"
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply eVGA SuperNOVA 1000w G3
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
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
25,559 (6.52/day)
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
3,012 (0.68/day)
Location
Zagreb, Croatia
System Name Windows 10 64-bit Core i7 6700
Processor Intel Core i7 6700
Motherboard Asus Z170M-PLUS
Cooling Corsair AIO
Memory 2 x 8 GB Kingston DDR4 2666
Video Card(s) Gigabyte NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB
Storage Western Digital Caviar Blue 1 TB, Seagate Baracuda 1 TB
Display(s) Dell P2414H
Case Corsair Carbide Air 540
Audio Device(s) Realtek HD Audio
Power Supply Corsair TX v2 650W
Mouse Steelseries Sensei
Keyboard CM Storm Quickfire Pro, Cherry MX Reds
Software MS Windows 10 Pro 64-bit

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
28,472 (4.25/day)
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 10850K@5.2GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z470 Taichi
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro w/ Noctua NF-A14 Fans
Memory 32GB DDR4-3600
Video Card(s) RTX 2070 Super
Storage 500GB SX8200 Pro + 8TB with 1TB SSD Cache
Display(s) Acer Nitro VG280K 4K 28"
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply eVGA SuperNOVA 1000w G3
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
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
1,871 (0.35/day)
Location
Heart of Eutopia!
System Name ibuytheusedstuff
Processor 5960x
Motherboard x99 sabertooth
Cooling old socket775 cooler
Memory 32 Viper
Video Card(s) 1080ti on morpheus 1
Storage raptors+ssd
Display(s) acer 120hz
Case open bench
Audio Device(s) onb
Power Supply antec 1200 moar power
Mouse mx 518
Keyboard roccat arvo
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
 

crazyeyesreaper

Not a Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Mar 25, 2009
Messages
9,752 (1.78/day)
Location
04578
System Name Old reliable
Processor Intel 8700K @ 4.8 GHz
Motherboard MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC
Cooling Custom Water
Memory 32 GB Crucial Ballistix 3666 MHz
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1080 Ti Gaming X
Storage 3x SSDs 2x HDDs
Display(s) Dell U2412M + Samsung TA350
Case Thermaltake Core P3 TG
Audio Device(s) Samson Meteor Mic / Generic 2.1 / KRK KNS 6400 headset
Power Supply Zalman EBT-1000
Mouse Mionix NAOS 7000
Keyboard Mionix
If they have dual platters, there will be a difference on the outside to make room for the extra space needed inside the drive.

I have multiple drives here with varying platter densities outside shells are the same. Granted they are Samsung HDDs
 
Joined
Mar 18, 2015
Messages
2,960 (0.90/day)
Location
Long Island
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
25,559 (6.52/day)
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

Not a Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Mar 25, 2009
Messages
9,752 (1.78/day)
Location
04578
System Name Old reliable
Processor Intel 8700K @ 4.8 GHz
Motherboard MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC
Cooling Custom Water
Memory 32 GB Crucial Ballistix 3666 MHz
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1080 Ti Gaming X
Storage 3x SSDs 2x HDDs
Display(s) Dell U2412M + Samsung TA350
Case Thermaltake Core P3 TG
Audio Device(s) Samson Meteor Mic / Generic 2.1 / KRK KNS 6400 headset
Power Supply Zalman EBT-1000
Mouse Mionix NAOS 7000
Keyboard Mionix
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.
 
Top