WD or Seagate HD?

I'm gonna buy a new hard drive in a couple of days and I was wondering which one you guys thought would be the better choice. I'm either gonna get the Seagate 60GB 7200RPM Barracuda IV for $92 or the WESTERN DIGITAL "SPECIAL EDITION" 80GB 7200RPM WD800JB for $115. I've heard that Seagate makes the very best (all around) hard drives and I've heard that Western Digital isn't bad but they aren't all that great. The Western Digital special edition has a 3 year warranty compared to the Seagates 1 year. It also has 20 more gb (which I really don't need, but more gb is always good). Finally it has the 8MB of cache compared to the Seagate's 2MB. After reading both reviews it seems like Western Digital's HD got the better scores overall, but the Seagate is definitely quieter. Right now I'm leaning towards the Western Digital HD right now but I'm still hesitent because I've heard that Seagates are the best. Out of these two, which one do you guys think is the better buy?

i have had pretty good luck with western digitals, not meaning to say seagateis a bad drive, given the choice
wd is on top of my list.

The only consideration as far as I'm concerned with those two harddrives, is performance. You might as well add Maxtor to the list too. That said, get the WD.... performance wise it's a no brainer.

Umm.. I highly doubt the need will ever arise in which you'd need to use 8 MBs of cache on your hard drive. Having said that and knowing you don't need all the room the WD offers, I'd say go for the Seagate being that it's lower in price. Don't know where you heard Seagates are the best, but I'd opt for an IBM or a Maxtor any day over either Seagate or WD.

Those Seagate Barracudas are dead silent. I just put one in a rig I am building for someone. They also seem to be built more solidly than anything IBM, WD, or Maxtor has to offer.

It's a tough choice, though. Both are great drives.

seagate

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BlueOval
Umm.. I highly doubt the need will ever arise in which you'd need to use 8 MBs of cache on your hard drive. Having said that and knowing you don't need all the room the WD offers, I'd say go for the Seagate being that it's lower in price. Don't know where you heard Seagates are the best, but I'd opt for an IBM or a Maxtor any day over either Seagate or WD.

---

Ya better go to cpuplanet.com and have a look at the reliability polls befor you recommend that IBM garbage.
Sea. WD and Maxtor all make reliable drives.

well i have had 0 problems with WD drives.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by StabilityLover

Ya better go to cpuplanet.com and have a look at the reliability polls befor you recommend that IBM garbage.
Sea. WD and Maxtor all make reliable drives.

---

I don't know how long you've been using/building/messing around with computers, but prior to the 75GXP fiasco, IBMs were considered the cream of the crop to many. Since then I think they've made a pretty good comeback. Seagate and WD may be better companies now than in the past as well. I wasn't knocking them, just stating my own opinion. I've owned several HDDs over the years including IBMs, Maxtors and Seagates and currently own 2 40GB 60GXPs which have given me zero problems over the last year and a half to two years. I stand by my earlier statement.

I have had some minor problems with my IBM 60GXP 60GB, but they have gone away. My new WD 80GB special edition has worked flawlessly and quietly. I recommend WD to anyone.:)

Well I'm a little surprised. I thought that the WD "Special edition" HD would get the majority of the votes but it seems to be just about even (which will delay my purchase). I have no problem spending the extra $20 if it's gonna be a better purchase (so to that extent $$$ isn't an issue). Although the fact that Seagate's are quiet is great, my HSF is very loud so that probably rules out the whole purpose of having a quiet HD (plus Western Digital's was also relatively quiet). I'm still having a hard time deciding. It looks like the Western Digital outperforms the Seagate (according to Storagereview).

WD "Special Edition" Pros:
Better performer
Has 20 more gb and 4x as much cache
Keeps cooler
3 year warranty

Seagate Barracude IV Pros:
Less noise
Seems to have better build quality
Cheaper cost

Right now I'm leaning towards the WD "Special edition" because it's advantages seem to be better to me. Plus Sharkyextreme chose it as their hard drive in their buyer's guide (except their's had more gb). Does anyone know of any real problems with WD "Special Edition" drive that I should be aware of? Anything else that makes the Seagate Barracude IV the better choice?

Thanks for all the help.

PS: The reason I'm not even looking into the Maxtor/IBM Hard drive is because a year or two ago I bought a Maxtor HD that was made by IBM (the box says Maxtor but on the HD itself it says IBM). Anyways it completely died on me in less than 2 years and I lost all of my stuff.

YGPM Jome

I love my Barracuda - it has been a very good drive. However there is nothing wrong with WD, they also make excellent equipment and that price makes it even better.

I just ordered the WD800JB OEM from Newegg for $114.
I'm running Maxtor drives right now and the WD is for the new setup I'm putting together slowly.

When you're buying OEM I know it doesn't come with the box, but do you still get the manuel and software?

I'm pretty sure I'm gonna buy the WD "Special Edition" hard drive as I believe it's the better of the two.

Ive got an older 30Gig Seagate that has run perfectly for well over 1.5 years. I have to say that I would recommend Seagate to anyone. That said I would get the WD if it were my choice. I'll take the extra 20Gig, the cache and the known reliablilty - no brainer. Either way you can't go wrong but the WD gets my vote!

Cheers,