That article left more questions than answers. During the spin-up, they registered at 7200 RPM, but are specified as 5400 RPM class. WD didn't say anything helpful, but one wonders if more extensive testing would reveal a variable RPM, perhaps based on activity level…
Unlike the CMR/SMR fiasco, this time WD provided more speed than advertised (and more noise and heat).
I just skimmed through the article. They introduced an abstract performance class, so you know what performance to expect, while leaving you in the dark about the true technichal specs at the same time. This is nasty! Especialy since those are consumer grade products..
This turns hdd purchase to a Kinder Surprise Egg experience, if you didn't read reviews about the drive beforehand.
Every unclear action has a reason. But you have to count, that there is 80% (Pareto) of buyers group where price factor is just one and only factor. And WD knows it. Rest of 20% buyers needs to take care about the value of the data stored driven by different indicators.
... maybe another reason, why BlackBaze totaly stopped WD for purchase in IIQ/2020
me from 2009
in case of power consumption there isn’t such big gap:
3W (difference) x 24h x 365days = 26.3kWh/y +Power factor 0.85 = 31kWh what is (up to where) few beers.
same for the cooling energy.
Repeated technology specification Misleading from WD is more dangerous phenomenon.