Time Machine Drive: Western Digital WD Red 3TB WD30EFRX?

[Melbourne Park]

I am wondering which is the best price performance for a time machine hard drive for inside a Mac Pro.

Does this Western Digital WD Red 3TB WD30EFRX fit the bill?

It costs $219 in Australia with local warranty for 3TB. I presume its NAS orientation is an advantage for a time machine drive?

Quite a bit cheaper is a WD 3TB Green drive ... but I have heard that they aren't great for Time Machine ...

 

[ashman70]

I don't think the NAS drive is going to benefit you in anyway as an internal drive, in fact I would be more inclined to go with a WD Black drive for an internal TM backup drive. Have you thought about external setups via firewire? If you got two of those NAS drives in an enclosure RAID 1, then the fact that they are NAS drives would benefit you.

 

[Melbourne Park]

I don't think the NAS drive is going to benefit you in anyway as an internal drive, in fact I would be more inclined to go with a WD Black drive for an internal TM backup drive. Have you thought about external setups via firewire? If you got two of those NAS drives in an enclosure RAID 1, then the fact that they are NAS drives would benefit you.

I appreciate your replay. Thanks.

But I think that an external firewire would be slower, more costly, take up desk space, less reliable, use more power and be noisier.

As far as speed goes, I understand Time Machine works better with a fast data connection. Hence Firewire 's slow speed would inhibit the system. The internal system is much quicker hence preferable. And cheaper too.

3GB black drives are expensive.

The Green 3GB drive is the cheapest alternative. But I have read that it is not satisfactory for Time Machine, I presume due to its response time, I also presume that its low energy philosophy inhibits its performance for Time Machine.

In comparison, I think a NAS drive is designed for continual operation, hence it may be better suited. It also has a longer warranty, hence I think its likely more reliable than a Green drive. I do not know however, how quick it is.

I am really just after the best bang for buck in a satisfactory Time Machine setup, and I think a 3GB drive would be better than a 2GB drive, although I estimate before video work I would have only 400 GB of data.

 

[ashman70]

There are many solutions out there designed as external solutions for TM using firewire, eSata (with an eSata card), USB and now thunderbolt. Any of them are suitable enough for time machine and fast enough as well. While NAS drives may be designed for continual use can they be that much cheaper then a WD Black drive? Your philosophy of 'best bang for the buck' is dangerous when it comes to designing a backup solution, no matter how simple it may be, at the end of the day, if you lose a drive full of data, your backup better be reliable. Spending a few extra dollars then on a WD Black drive, might seem like a good investment if they drive lasts and is there when you need it most, its like insurance, right?

 

[Lance-AR]

TLER is the big feature for the red line. Their performance is higher than the green but I would not hesitate to use the green line for TM. How much data are you incrementally backing up? The initial backup will be slow either way.

 

[Melbourne Park]

TLER is the big feature for the red line. Their performance is higher than the green but I would not hesitate to use the green line for TM. How much data are you incrementally backing up? The initial backup will be slow either way.

Less than 500 GB. I am going for a 250GB SSD boot drive, keeping the stock 1GB drive for video, and will get the extra internal for TM.

As far as black 3GB drives, we do not have them for sale yet it seems (in Australia). 3GB Red and Green are available. If the green does the job, its certainly a fair bit cheaper than the Red. From the sound of it though, the Red sounded like it would be more robust. I presume the stock drive from Apple, would be fine for video. I am not sure which drives they are ... I presume they are Hitachi 7200 RPM drives, but I do not know which kind.

 

[Lance-AR]

I believe I read somewhere on here that the time capsules used the green line. I keep my active data on a Pegasus PR6. It backs up to a time capsule. I have no idea how long it usually takes because it runs in the background and I don't notice it. If you want performance, black > red > green. I believe the warranty follows that order as well.

 

[Melbourne Park]

I believe I read somewhere on here that the time capsules used the green line. I keep my active data on a Pegasus PR6. It backs up to a time capsule. I have no idea how long it usually takes because it runs in the background and I don't notice it. If you want performance, black > red > green. I believe the warranty follows that order as well.

Yes - 5/3/2 years.

I rang WD, and curiously, what they said was wrong! They said the Green is 32 cache, with 3 years warranty. And the Red is the same warranty, with 64 cache.

The fellow did not seem to understand the Red's technology.

But reading the specs, its 2 years for green, but with 64 cache

I went with the Green, and just bought 2GB. It cost $109, which was a lot cheaper than the other alternatives.

I will monitor if performance becomes an issue.

If the drive fails, I don't see a problem. Because its just a back-up. I suspect when I learn TM, I may be able to manage the performance issues.

I also suspect, this may be my last winchester drive. With SSD prices falling, I can see a fault tolerant striped array becoming a more sensible solution, for the whole computer. If a drive failed, remove it and plug in another, and it would rebuild. Of course, there is not "time machine", but who knows, perhaps a couple of arrayed SSDs might achieve that in a couple of years, pretty cheaply.

I wonder how many SSDs one can fit into a single Mac Pro's drive bay!!!