WD 400gb RE2 vs. SE16

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bob Davis
  • Start date Start date
B

Bob Davis

WD sells two similar 400gb SATA drives, the RE2 and SE16. They claim the
RE2 is optimized for RAID and is not recommended for single-drive setups in
workstations, yet I've seen tests where it excels in single-drive mode,
performing even better than the SE16. Has anyone any first-hand experience
with this drive in single-drive (i.e., non-RAID) mode? Any problems or
glitches?

What attracts me to the RE2 is that it is an enterprise drive with a 5-year
warranty, while the SE16 is only 3 years--and the price is only $4
difference at Newegg.

--
 
Previously Bob Davis said:
WD sells two similar 400gb SATA drives, the RE2 and SE16. They claim the
RE2 is optimized for RAID and is not recommended for single-drive setups in
workstations, yet I've seen tests where it excels in single-drive mode,
performing even better than the SE16. Has anyone any first-hand experience
with this drive in single-drive (i.e., non-RAID) mode? Any problems or
glitches?
Click to expand...
What attracts me to the RE2 is that it is an enterprise drive with a 5-year
warranty, while the SE16 is only 3 years--and the price is only $4
difference at Newegg.
Click to expand...

The RAID edition does not try so hard to recover difficult to read
sectors. It stops after a limited time, so as not to be kicked
from the array. It seems that WD drives have problems reading
data frequently enough for this to be an issue. My conclusion
would be not to buy WD at all, since the other manufacturers do
not seem to have this porblem.

Arno
 
Back
Top