Western Digital AV-25

Why hasn't there been any talk about these in pc applications? I know these are meant for audio/video streaming devices, but everything about it seems fantastic.

Compared with the Scorpio Blue:

-32 v. 8 mb cache.
-4.2 v. 5.5 ms latency.
-22/25 v. 24/26 db noise
-1.6 v. 2.5 watt read/write
-0.65 v. 0.85 watt idle
-Rated 1 million hours mtbf
-500gb price is the same as Scorpio Blue

What am I missing about the performance of this hdd?

 

Actually, I find that the average price of the AV-25 seems to be about $10 more than the Scorpio Blue, putting it about on par price-wise with a 7200 RPM drive. They're also not as easily available as a Scopio Blue, being harder to find.

As well, going to the respective PDF technical specs ( Scorpio Blue, AV-25), the 500 GB drives are listed as having identical specs, apart from the cache (and maybe the MTBF, which isn't listed in the PDF).

 

Where'd you read those specs? Negg says 5.5ms latency.

 

Both are $59 at newegg. Even if it was $10, that's only $10 for a potentially better drive:

The specs tabs for each show differently from the pdf's:

WD Scorpio Blue 500 GB SATA Hard Drives ( WD5000BPVT )
WD AV-25 500 GB AV SATA Hard Drives ( WD5000BUDT )

 

Any difference between this and the normal 2.5" SATA drive? Otherwise how can WD claim 1+ million hours MTBF?

 

Yes, it's a different drive.

 

Looks interesting I guess if you don't want 7200rpm drive.

Where did you get those specs?

 

I'm looking for a data drive to put in the ultrabay (ssd for o/s) that'll run efficiently.

Look at the 'Specifications' tab on each page:

WD Scorpio Blue 500 GB SATA Hard Drives ( WD5000BPVT )
WD AV-25 500 GB AV SATA Hard Drives ( WD5000BUDT )

 

I'd be more inclined to trust the PDFs (also reachable from the specifications tab). Note how the PDF has different values for different sizes of the Scorpio Blues, and yet when you use the specifications tab and change sizes, all that changes is the size.

 

The pdf also shows the exact same power consumption for the Scorpio Black compared to those two where the tab shows 1.8. Specs on both seem to be off. We'll find out friday when they reopen.

 

Going by Tomshardware the Toshiba MK5055GSX is the lowest power 500GB hard drive. Toshiba tends to be quiet too.

If it's used as a secondary hard drive you could make it power down very quickly, which will make the power consumption less important.

 

Exact same? The Scorpio Black PDF is here, and the power consumption for the Scorpio Black 500 GB is completely different than the 500 GB entry for the Scorpio Blue one...

Of course, as has been noted previously, actual power consumption will often vary from what the manufacturer states. I suspect though, that within the same testing methodology (which is what I would hope WD uses for their own numbers), the numbers should come out roughly equivalent. Thus, when WD says that their Scorpio Black consumes more energy during read/write and idle compared to the Scorpio Blue, then it actually does, although maybe not to the numbers that they state.

 

AV-25 doesnt have WD shock guard or secure parking technology. Its designed for stationary and continuous use on smaller DVR's.

Shock protection is a must for active portable devices like notebooks.

How they calculate the MTBF is by testing large batches of the hard drive and calculating the mean time (average time) between each individual unit failure.

eg. Manufacturer tests 1500 units of hard disk and gets an average of 30 days operation between each individual disk failure. The MTBF of the disk is 1500 x 30 x 24 hours = 1 mill hours.

These figures are crucial to calculate reliability on large RAID arrays.

 

Well I mean the same as a 2.5" SATA drive as in;



The same physical components? And that may not be a good way of calculating MTBF. If they have a "good" batch of hard drive that indeed last a very long time. But then they make a "bad" batch, some factory work slips up and the assembly line goes bumpity bump resulting in a bad batch. As with the same thing with SSD's with the 1+ million hour MTBF.

 

I don't know what WD did to the WD5000BEVT but performance looks amazing:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/har...964-amazing-wd5000bevt-benchmark-results.html

 

Manufacturers have quality control standards to ensure they dont create and release a big batch of dud drives.

Whats the manufacturing date for that drive?

 

I've asked him. Here's the review:
Western Digital Scorpio Blue WD5000BEVT, 500GB SATA-300, 8MB, 5400rpm review door marti-n | Core | Tweakers.net Productreviews

 

Just like Seagate's QC a few years back with the Barracuda drives? My friend ordered 10 1.5 TB drives back then, 6 DOA, 2 died within 2 weeks.

 

Yes thats why its wise to choose the right brand as each manufacturer has its own QC processes Seagate has bungled many times over the years, from QC to Firmware updates. WD in comparison have been good so i stick with them when it comes to mass storage.

 

I didn't notice that. Pretty much rules it out. So I guess it'll be down to the WD5000BEVT then.

Although I'm considering keeping my WD3200BEKT as the storage drive for the reason Phil pointed out. I can't think of when I'm going to need to use the data drive when on battery power. Even if watching a movie on the go, I'd copy the file to the ssd and watch it off that. So the data drive could be put to standby. Standby power difference between Blue and Black is 0-.05w.

 

That's why I only buy and recommend WD drives.

 

I'm going to get Intel X25-M G2 as a main drive for my ThinkPad T61 and looking for a secondary drive to put in the UltraBay. Is 320gb AV-25 a good choice for this considering the price difference is negligible comparing to Scorpio Blue of the same size and 250gb Scorpio Black (8mb and 16mb respectively)? The drive would be for normal use (not A/V), SSD for OS and apps, HDD for storage.

 

As per Flipfire:

If you're not going to move your notebook at all while it's on (and you can be sure that noone is going to touch or bump it), then it might be alright, but otherwise, any bumps could ruin your hard drive.

 

Thanks, missed that somehow. Guess I'll just go for Hitachi.