WD Blue 1,000 GiB SSD Review

Introduction

We tested the 1,000 GiB WD Blue SSD from Western Digital. Let’s seek how does it perform.
After acquiring SanDisk last year, Western Digital (WD) launched the WD Blue SSD family, which is a mainstream line, and the WD Green, which are aimed to low cost and low energy consumption. Both families are available on 2.5 inches and M.2 2280 form factors, both using SATA-600 interface.
We tested the WD Blue 1,000 GiB with 2.5″ form factor, part number WDS199T1B0A. Besides this one, manufacturer also offers WD Blue in 250 GiB and 500 GiB models.
The 1,000 GiB WD Blue has internally 1,024 GiB, but since it spares 24 GiB for overprovisioning and wearing balancing, it is sold as 1,000 GiB. It is important to say that this model is actually not 1 TiB, since 1 TiB equals 1,024 GiB.
Before proceeding, we highly suggest that you read our “Anatomy of SSD Units” tutorial, which provides all the background information you need to know about SSDs.
The WD Blue SSD uses TLC (triple level cell) memories. This kind of memory stores not two, as on most MLC memory chips, but three bits instead. It allows a higher data density and, thus, a smaller manufacturing cost for a same capacity chip.
The issues with TLC memory chips, compared to the two-bit MLC chips (and even more compared to the SLC memory chip, that store only one bit per cell) are the smaller speed (due to the error correcting mechanism) and a shorter lifespan, because there is more cell wearing on the erasing process (executed before writing new data).
The TBW (total bytes written, which means the amount of data written on the drive before it begin to experience tearing problems) for this model is 400 TiB (the same of the 960 GiB Kingston UV400, for example). Obviously, this is a very high number and must not worry most users, but it makes this model inadvisable for applications that need a big amount of data writing, like servers, for example.
We compared the WD Blue 1,000 GiB to the HyperX Savage 480 GiB, since we had no other SSD with similar capacity at our lab by now. So, keep in mind that the two SSDs compared are not direct competitors.
In the table below, we compared the tested units. All of them use SATA-600 interface and the 2.5” form factor, with 7 mm height.

In the table below, we compared technical specs of the tested drives.