Blue or Green WD SSD??

M

MirageF1

Executive Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2018
Messages
8,233
Reaction score
4,628
Hi have an old (relatively ;) - 2013 model )T420 running W10 v1809 (Intel Core i5-2520M dual-core processor (2.5GHz, up to 3.2GHz Turbo Boost, 3MB cache) which I have optimized and configured (disabled all non critical services for example) and suits my current needs adequately.
However the single 320GB Seagate HDD which I have partitioned into 2 equal virtual drives ( running a dual boot W10 and Win7 setup) is the bottleneck currently and booting up, copying to external drive, loading time for large programs like Adobe PS etc is starting to be a grind...

I've read sterling reviews on both the Blue and Green WD SSD's, so basically my question is will I notice any real difference between the 2, as the official reported read/write speeds are both in the 500+ Mb/s which are 25-50 times faster than the current 10-20 Mb/s I get with the Seagate :)

The WD 240GB Green SSD is currently available online for < R500 which I am thinking of purchasing.
 
I got myself two greens they aren't super fast but they do the job. One is used for games I want to load quicker, the other is for the OS.
 
Lupus said:
I got myself two greens they aren't super fast but they do the job. One is used for games I want to load quicker, the other is for the OS.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't it have been cheaper and more efficient to rather buy one bigger, better-specced SSD then the 2 entry-level greens?]
 
deesef said:
Wouldn't it have been cheaper and more efficient to rather buy one bigger, better-specced SSD then the 2 entry-level greens?]
Click to expand...

At the time the two SSDs came up to a grand on the dot, a bigger one was R1100, but yeah I originally ordered my PC parts from wootware with just one SSD and after a little bit of playing realised that 250gigs for OS and a game wasn't enough anymore :-)
 
They key difference between Green and Blue SSDs is that the Blue has a DRAM cache. The lack of DRAM cache on the Green means that looking up files on the SSD takes longer and updating the look up table requires extra write cycles, which causes extra wear to the NAND flash.

It is not advisable to have an OS installed on a DRAMless SSD, because of the shear number of small files the OS uses and modifications to system files.
 
Ghost729 said:
They key difference between Green and Blue SSDs is that the Blue has a DRAM cache. The lack of DRAM cache on the Green means that looking up files on the SSD takes longer and updating the look up table requires extra write cycles, which causes extra wear to the NAND flash.

It is not advisable to have an OS installed on a DRAMless SSD, because of the shear number of small files the OS uses and modifications to system files.
Click to expand...
Ahh and here I was going to make this my boot drive for speed reasons...hmmm that might change things drastically now. Can't afford corruption or loss on the boot drive/sector... that would defeat the primary reason I purchase one in the first place.
 
Lupus said:
At the time the two SSDs came up to a grand on the dot, a bigger one was R1100, but yeah I originally ordered my PC parts from wootware with just one SSD and after a little bit of playing realised that 250gigs for OS and a game wasn't enough anymore :)
Click to expand...
Yeah....TB M.2 FTW
 
MirageF1 said:
Hi have an old (relatively ;) - 2013 model )T420 running W10 v1809 (Intel Core i5-2520M dual-core processor (2.5GHz, up to 3.2GHz Turbo Boost, 3MB cache) which I have optimized and configured (disabled all non critical services for example) and suits my current needs adequately.
However the single 320GB Seagate HDD which I have partitioned into 2 equal virtual drives ( running a dual boot W10 and Win7 setup) is the bottleneck currently and booting up, copying to external drive, loading time for large programs like Adobe PS etc is starting to be a grind...

I've read sterling reviews on both the Blue and Green WD SSD's, so basically my question is will I notice any real difference between the 2, as the official reported read/write speeds are both in the 500+ Mb/s which are 25-50 times faster than the current 10-20 Mb/s I get with the Seagate :)

The WD 240GB Green SSD is currently available online for < R500 which I am thinking of purchasing.
Click to expand...
Waiting on my blue to be delivered :)

After my leftover ebs I paid about R400 on TA. I were looking at the evo 860 500gb, but I just don't have that extra odd 1k.

I would if I could replace all drives with samsung evo pro range ;)

Finally replacing my dinosaur-os drive: 160GB Seagate ST3160815AS :ROFL::ROFL::ROFL:
 
Last edited:
ekske1 said:
Waiting on my blue to be delivered :)

After my leftover ebs I paid about R400 on TA. I were looking at the evo 860 500gb, but I just don't have that extra odd 1k.

I would if I could replace all drives with samsung evo pro range ;)

Finally replacing my dinosaur-os drive: 160GB Seagate ST3160815AS :ROFL::ROFL::ROFL:
Click to expand...

You don't have to buy new, I got a 960GB samsung enterprise ssd on carb for a steal.
 
Thor said:
Blue or Samsung EVO/PRO


WD green is very slow for a ssd.
Click to expand...
Well from real life experience, Windows booting in 10 seconds Vs 7 seconds isn't really that much of a train smash to be honest. A friend paid R1100 for an Evo and it boots Windows in 7c seconds my one is 10 to 11.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X