Hard Drive Technologies

Reviews, Guides, Tips and Recovery of Hard Disk Drive Data

Western Digital Caviar Blue 500GB [WD5000AAKX] Hard Disk Drive Review : Video

January 24, 2013 Jon 29 Comments



http://www.nicolas11x12techx.com/ Nicolas11x12 reviewing and benchmarking the Western Digital Caviar Blue 500GB [WD5000AAKX] Hard Disk Drive. Manufacturer: W…
Video Rating: 4 / 5

PS3 Hard Disk Drive Mounting Bracket.
Video Rating: 0 / 5

Similar Posts:

#500GB#Blue#Caviar#Digital#Disk#drive#Hard#Review#Video#WD5000AAKX#Western

Previous Post

Next Post

Comments

  1. frenchnode
    January 24, 2013 - 2:08 am

    C’est une grosse daube ce disque. J’ai toute une série qui lâche !

  2. Mārtiņš Markss
    January 24, 2013 - 2:16 am

    Worked for 1 day for me than weird problems, it even doesnt show it RPM speed and got lot of bad cl**ters

  3. maycon sousa costa
    January 24, 2013 - 2:31 am

    eu comprei esse hd mais falam porai que ele dura menos tempo

  4. עידן כהן
    January 24, 2013 - 2:45 am

    i want results on raid 0 option with this hard drive

  5. jebbtalle
    January 24, 2013 - 2:55 am

    black n***a is much faster.

  6. mangkaw321
    January 24, 2013 - 3:10 am

    What is the difference between blue and black? I look at their site and looked at the specification and nothing is different?

  7. EWS60008
    January 24, 2013 - 3:54 am

    I’ve just got one of these today after my Shamsung 160GB disk decided to give up the ghost about a fortnight ago. I hear that Western Digital are quite reliable for performance as well.

  8. RooooXiii
    January 24, 2013 - 4:18 am

    I gonna buy this one today 😀

  9. Zak Murtagh
    January 24, 2013 - 5:06 am

    Will be more or less the same, as HDD’s cant even use the full bandwith of 3.0GBps in a sata 2 port.

  10. KingMacintosh
    January 24, 2013 - 5:19 am

    I was going to get this model, then I remembered every WDC I owned has failed me, so I went with a Samsung 500GB 3.5″. Seagate and sometimes Samsung/Hitachi for HDDs for me. My Samsung, now ‘By Seagate’ gets a: min. 108.7, max 154.1, and average 141.4MB/s and 8.06 ms access time and a 194 MB/s burst rate. All overall better with a tiny bit higher on the access rate, but believe you me WDC drives aren’t very solid or consistent with their speeds; trying running that after time and/or w/wo data.

  11. JohnSTF72
    January 24, 2013 - 5:34 am

    Would you recomend this as a main hard drive (C:) for older computers? I have a core2duo e8400 with 3GB of Ram running Windows XP SP3.

  12. Nicolas11x12TECHX
    January 24, 2013 - 6:27 am

    Yes, indeed. 2.5″ drives are mostly built in laptops and notebooks, but SSDs also use the 2.5″ form factor.

  13. Eric Tan
    January 24, 2013 - 7:10 am

    Hmm basically 2.5″ are still uh how u say up to date HDD then right , as long its SATA 3 , 6GB/S ?

  14. frenchnode
    January 24, 2013 - 8:03 am

    C’est une grosse daube ce disque. J’ai toute une série qui lâche !

  15. Mārtiņš Markss
    January 24, 2013 - 8:07 am

    Worked for 1 day for me than weird problems, it even doesnt show it RPM speed and got lot of bad cl**ters

  16. maycon sousa costa
    January 24, 2013 - 8:27 am

    eu comprei esse hd mais falam porai que ele dura menos tempo

  17. עידן כהן
    January 24, 2013 - 8:29 am

    i want results on raid 0 option with this hard drive

  18. jebbtalle
    January 24, 2013 - 8:56 am

    black n***a is much faster.

  19. mangkaw321
    January 24, 2013 - 9:11 am

    What is the difference between blue and black? I look at their site and looked at the specification and nothing is different?

  20. EWS60008
    January 24, 2013 - 9:40 am

    I’ve just got one of these today after my Shamsung 160GB disk decided to give up the ghost about a fortnight ago. I hear that Western Digital are quite reliable for performance as well.

  21. RooooXiii
    January 24, 2013 - 10:23 am

    I gonna buy this one today 😀

  22. Zak Murtagh
    January 24, 2013 - 10:59 am

    Will be more or less the same, as HDD’s cant even use the full bandwith of 3.0GBps in a sata 2 port.

  23. KingMacintosh
    January 24, 2013 - 11:19 am

    I was going to get this model, then I remembered every WDC I owned has failed me, so I went with a Samsung 500GB 3.5″. Seagate and sometimes Samsung/Hitachi for HDDs for me. My Samsung, now ‘By Seagate’ gets a: min. 108.7, max 154.1, and average 141.4MB/s and 8.06 ms access time and a 194 MB/s burst rate. All overall better with a tiny bit higher on the access rate, but believe you me WDC drives aren’t very solid or consistent with their speeds; trying running that after time and/or w/wo data.

  24. JohnSTF72
    January 24, 2013 - 11:58 am

    Would you recomend this as a main hard drive (C:) for older computers? I have a core2duo e8400 with 3GB of Ram running Windows XP SP3.

  25. Nicolas11x12TECHX
    January 24, 2013 - 12:09 pm

    Yes, indeed. 2.5″ drives are mostly built in laptops and notebooks, but SSDs also use the 2.5″ form factor.

  26. Eric Tan
    January 24, 2013 - 12:22 pm

    Hmm basically 2.5″ are still uh how u say up to date HDD then right , as long its SATA 3 , 6GB/S ?

  27. mightyzeus91
    January 24, 2013 - 12:34 pm

    lol loved the background music in this video

  28. Nicolas11x12TECHX
    January 24, 2013 - 12:35 pm

    Yes, this HDD is pretty good. 3.5″ drives mostly offer bigger capacities.

  29. Eric Tan
    January 24, 2013 - 1:13 pm

    Whats the different when they meant 2.5 ” and 3.5 ” the size ? Is this HDD any good = =?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published / Required fields are marked *

Blue Captcha Image
Refresh

*