Scorpio Blue vs Travelstar 5k500.b

I've narrowed down my choices to these two, but I can't really seem to get a steady answer on which is better, mainly due to inconsistent benchmarks.

There really isn't alot of information on the travelstar, but does it perform better than the scorpio blue?

 

The WD5000BEVT and the Hitachi 5K500.B are nearly identical in speed. Seriously, I doubt you will see any real life difference in performance between the two.
The Hitachi is more energy efficient and will result in less of a drain of battery. That is its main advantage over the competition.

K-TRON

 

would it be safe to assume that the 5k500.b is at least as power efficient as the older version>?

 

As power efficient as the 5K500 ?

If thats what you mean, than yes and more-so
The 5K500 was based on three platters. To keep three platters spinning at 5400rpm requires more current to keep the extra weight spinning at a constant speed. The 5K500.B is based on two platters, and has a very efficient power monitoring system onboard. It is quite a bit more energy efficient than any other drive in its class.

K-TRON

 

could you give me the power consumption ratings that you would trust?

I can't seem to find consistent ones and that's actually my difficulty. Some reviews say the blue is better, some even say the caviar black has better power consumption (I call bs on that).

 

John Ratsey did tests
He found the WD5000BEVT to take 2.5 watts and the Hitachi takes 2.3 watts.
He did tests in the same laptop, so its pretty accurate information
Those are the only hard numbers we have other than than manufacturer spec sheets.

K-TRON

 

what about at idle?

the 2.3 is quite off what the data sheets say. ?

 

those are maximum power usage values. The idle should be much lower than that, like around 1 watt

The Hitachi data sheet says 1.7 watts read, 0.5 watt idle
The WD sheet says 2.5 watt write, 0.85 watt idle

regardless the Hitachi should be more power efficient in load and idle.

K-TRON

 

I was watching the power consumption while running the HD tune benchmark. Tests were done in an external enclosure connected via eSATA and I measured the current used by the enclosure (which was 0.09A without a disc inside). The testing is intended to be comparable to the results I reported here.

The 5K500.B + enclosure drew 0.55A under test which means 0.46A = 2.3W. It is possible that the enclosure's power consumption also increases under load but since eSATA is essentially a pass-through connector the chips in the enclosure shouldn't need to do much work. The power drain during the sequential read benchmark was (0.48-0.09) = 0.37A = 1.85W which is getting nearer to Hitachi's numbers.

Another indication of performance is the PCMark05 WinXP startup test. The 5K500.B scored 9.04MB/s compared with the WD's 8.34MB/s.

However, the 5K500.B is slightly noiser but it is not an unpleasant noise: A slight ticking when the heads move. The noise from the WD5000BEVT is more muted.

My WD5000BEVT has clocked up over 2000 hours so it has now moved to the reserve status.

John

 

alright, screw it. I'm ordering a pair of one of these models today. they'll be going into a Raid 0 setup. Unless you all think the WD will give me better access times or real-world performance, I'll be ordering a pair of 5K500.B's.

any final thoughts? John or K-TRON?

 

I posted some more comparative results here. However, that benchmark doesn't include access time where the WD has its nose in front and the Seagate is some way behind.

The WD5000BEVT is comfortably ahead on its write performance, which most benchmarks don't address. However, most usage tends to be reading.

John

 

So John...real-world performance (power-consumption aside): for my usage (heavy photoshop, large .psd files + saving regularly, smallish databases), will one serve me better than the other? or is it really a wash?

...or should I buy two of each, raid 0 them, drop an image on and see what the results look like? To me that feels like overkill and if the difference is significantly small, I can save on all the energy I'm putting into deciding which to get and flip a coin. But if you think my usage makes one more advantageous, please speak now.

Thanks again. oh, and +rep.

 

I would tend to favor the Hitachi on the grounds that newer is usually better.

John

 

I just went with the 5k500.b

 

thanks, John. went with the 5K.

 

In the same boat with a decision here. There are a couple of 2.5" 250GB-per-platter 5400rpm drives:

* Fujitsu MJA2-BH
* Hitachi 5k500.b
* WD5000EBVT
* Seagate Momentus 5400.6

Fujitsu looks interesting.. no benchmark on it though. Claims 0.6W standby and 1.3/1.4W read/write. I know fujitsu make some of the most efficient drives so would very much like to know how good this one is. The closest thing I've found to compare them all is this chart.

 

Maybe Fujitsu have made a significant improvement in the power management since the MHZ2320BH which I found has worse than average power consumption.

Toms Hardware has some useful charts based on actual measurements but they don't include the latest HDDs.

John

 

Sorry to belabor this thread.

It appears I'm in the same situation as ajreynol, though I doubt I will need a ton of storage. I'd like to get an external HD and enclosure for my new lenovo x200s. It will be for archiving, backup, storage, etc, nothing crazy, no games, maybe a few movies/music here and there (though I may keep my entire music collection on it).

A) which HD would the experts suggest?!
B) would you suggest 2x 160/250/320 gb HDs so that I have 1 as backup in case the other fails? Or would 1 suffice? If so, any opinions on brand/model?
C) if B, am I looking at 2 enclosures or 1 that houses 2 hard drives?
D) any opinions on enclosures?

Thanks!!