• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

wd blue 2012(much better than 2015) vs barracuda 2016(has better read and write)

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

PotentialPit95

Registered
Joined
Jan 17, 2017
On userbenchmark barracuda has better read and write but wd blue (2012, the 2015 super sucks compared to 2012)has faster random 4k.

I'm just wondering which one will load up my data(like game saves) faster, barracuda has that read so... im already going with barracuda but i was wondering if any1 could prove me wrong
 

Mandrake4565

Mr. Clean Senior Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2012
You're splitting hairs....It's not like you're talking some huge difference in read and write speeds. If it were my rig I'd go with WD or HGST over Seagate any day due to reliability.
 
OP
P

PotentialPit95

Registered
Joined
Jan 17, 2017
You're splitting hairs....It's not like you're talking some huge difference in read and write speeds. If it were my rig I'd go with WD or HGST over Seagate any day due to
reliability.

nope just checked again its 10% sry but the new barracudas are pretty reliable no compaints at all almost 5 stars im pretty sure. and random read is only 8% better but the random write is 47% better.


Also wd has a higher peek performance thanks for changing my mind thx

also you may not know this but 2k15 wd blue super sucks ALways get 2012.
 
Last edited:

trents

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2008
A lot of the newer spinner hard drives have variable speed technologies built in and tend to be slower than your good ole 7200 rpm drive. That's why they don't advertise them at a certain RPM.