- Specification and Closer Look
- Test Bench and Testing Methodology
- AS SSD Benchmark
- AIDA64 Access Test
- ATTO Benchmark
- Anvil Benchmark
- Boot Load Test
- Futuremark Benchmarks
- View All
Keeping the devices as slim as possible is something manufacturers are obsessed about when it comes to ultrabooks and other portable device types, but at the same time, its almost not possible unless other hardware components compliment such drives and maintain as less footprint as possible. WD and Seagate have their own 7mm thick drive. Seagate has a 5mm thick drive for android devices… WD’s 1TB SPCX was sent to me for evaluation,and the drive is very thin. There are 2x 500GB platters Lets see how the drive performs!
This drive uses Marvell 88i9446-BRL2 controller and a 16MB MB Buffer. WD10SPCX is a 5400RPM drive and rated up to 65 degrees Celsius operating temperature. That’s twice more capacity (and twice the platters), twice the buffer DRAM and maintains the same thickness of 7mm in comparison with WD5000LPVT. Even the model number is smaller 😛 .
The actual usable space on the drive is 931GB. It gives me great pleasure every time I put up a review. Its always good to appreciate the support that the manufacturers give from time-to-time to review their own products and others on behalf of the readers. Thanks to companies such as Asus, Gigabyte, Kingston, WD and Coolermaster who give me hardware support by updating my test rig no strings attached. Thumbs up to these guys! I would like to thank
- Gigabyte India for providing Gigabyte 890GPA UD3H Rev 1.0 motherboard
- Asus India for providing Asus 990FX Sabertooth motherboard
- Kingston Taiwan for providing hardware support with memory kits and SSD drive.
- WD India for providing WD 300GB HLFS Velociraptor Hard Drive.
- Coolermaster India for providing Coolermaster GX450 RS-450-ACAA-D3 Power Supply
|Test Setup for:||WD 1TB Slim WD10SPCX 2.5” 7mm SATA III Storage Drive|
|Motherboard+ Processor||Gigabyte 890GPAUD3H Rev 1.0+ AMD 965BE|
|Memory||Kingston KHX1600C9D3P1K28G HyperX Genesis 8GB 1600MHz DDRIII|
|Primary OS drive||WD 3000HLFS Velociraptor 300GB/ WD Blue AAJS 320GB/ WD 1TB Velociraptor|
|Power Supply||Corsair TX750|
The Benchmarks that I am using are as follows: AS SSD– Read and Write (Pass 3)
ATTO- Test File Size= 0.5 to 8MB- Read and Write Pass 3
Aida64- Write and Read Access time File Size 64KB Pass 3
Anvil Benchmark- Compressible and Incompressible run each with 4, 16 and 32MB File Size
Boot Load Test- (Windows 7 SP1 clean installation with AMD 12.6 drivers+ AHCI drivers pre-installed with Utorrent, Avira Security Suite, Asus Xonar DX+ 126.96.36.1994 Drivers, Netgear WG111 Wireless LAN USB drive software as start-up items) Pass 1-5 (Pass 1 = System start from Power Off)
CrystalDisk Mark Benchmark- with Pass 3, each with 5 re-runs 1000MB File Size
HDTune Pro- Write and Read Pass 3
PCMark 7- HDD test
PCMark Vantage- HDD Test
Anvil Benchmark- 4/16/32GB File Size in both 0% and 100% Fill test
Although this test is used for SSDs, the tests in these give a good idea of Sequential, 4K Aligned, 4K Aligned with 64Bit thread test and the Access time of the hard drive using incompressible data.
In write access, the 1TB matches with the 500GB counterpart, whereas in read take bit longer than the other 2 7mm drives.
From 8KB file run, the performance of both read and write is pretty much the same.. WD Blue 500GB WD5000LPVT has more punch over Seagate Laptop Thin ST500LM000 on larger files, while Seagate laptop thin has better performance on smaller file size tests. 1TB, pretty much stands somewhere in the middle of these drives overall.
Windows 7 SP1 clean installation with AMD 12.6 drivers+ AHCI drivers pre-installed with Utorrent, Avira Security Suite, Asus Xonar DX+ 188.8.131.524 Drivers, Netgear WG111 Wireless LAN USB drive software as start-up items) Pass 1-5 (Pass 1 = System start from Power Off 1TB SPCX takes few seconds more than WD 500GB LPVT counterpart to boot up, except on the 5th pass. For a mechanical drive, Seagate’s Laptop Thin SSHD 500GB does a very VERY good job of reducing boot load speed!! THIS is where the implementation on flash NAND becomes very useful, as on 2 passes, it matches Samsung 840 Pro’s boot load speed. CrystalDisk Mark Benchmark HDTune Pro Benchmark Seagate Laptop Thin 500GB SSHD’s flash NAND reduced the drive’s write access.
When it comes to boot load and write access tests, Seagate 500GB SSHD has a significant advantage because of their drive using a flash NAND. It doesn’t match SSDs such as 840 and 840 pro, but the load times are reduced. PCMark runs which simulate ‘near’-real world’ scenarios show advantage on some tests. Notebooks drives with flash NANDs make a lot more sense now that I think about it. WD can do the same.
Note that both the WD slim drives listed on Amazon US and UK are marked 8MB Cache, but its actually 16MB.
Edit (21.09.13): There was a time all hard drives had a standard warranty period of 5 years. Now it’s only WD Black series which comes with 5 years warranty, followed by Red, Blue and Green with a much lesser warranty period. This drive comes with 2 years warranty period. Not a good sign. WD needs to look towards Seagate’s Laptop SSHD, a 7mm counterpart. That comes with a flash NAND to improve boot speed and with 3 years standard warranty period. True, the warranty period doesn’t reflect the lifespan of the product, but I believe that warranty period should be kept standard. That being said, Seagate 5mm 500GB ultrathin drive which I now have for review seem to come with 2 years warranty period as well. At the time of writing, Seagate’s 500GB SSHD costs $80, which makes it a pretty decent deal for what its worth. A 3-year warranty should be the bare minimum- period.