Small, quiet, fast

The WD Elements Portable is a relatively small external hard drive. It is a little wider than most external hard drives, but very briefly.
The housing is a pure plastic housing. Nevertheless, I find it very appealing design standard. It is handy and comfortable to hold and has four very small, millimeter-sized feet, on which it stands and as much as possible, to avoid accidental displacement of the housing. This does not work on all surfaces.

Since I have a 1 TB disk from Toshiba (Toshiba PA4265E-1HJ0 STOR.E ALU 2S 1TB external hard drive (6.4 cm (2.5 inches), USB 3.0) Black, supplied not only in an aluminum housing, but is still about 12 euros cheaper, I was curious as to whether the purchase of WD has paid off.

As I said, the housing of the WD is slightly smaller and only plastic. Thermally seems to be a problem, because with a one-hour endurance both plates reached a temperature of 49-50 ° C. Since they do not take much. The only difference is that the Toshiba is designed for temperatures up to 55 ° C and the WD to 60 ° C. So it's a larger buffer it.
The Toshiba will cost 69 Euro only 3 euros more than the single plate (ie without external enclosure).
When WD the comparison is a little more difficult. It incorporates a WD10JMVW. A record that there are not buying individual at the moment. But it is a plate of the Scorpio Blue series. These are available in various Händlen for about 66 euros (ie as the single Toshiba). You pay at the moment so a supplement of 15 euros for the housing.

The included cable is more flexible than that of the Toshiba - but just briefly.

The mandatory benchmarks (with HD Tune Pro 5:50):

Read benchmark over the whole disk:
WD:
54.0 - 114.5 MB / s, average 88.5 MB / s, burst rate: 149.7 MB / s
Toshiba:
51.0 - 109.7 MB / s, average 84.5 MB / s, burst rate: 152.4 MB / s

File Benchmark:
WD:
Read / write
Sequential: 112955/113694 kb / s
4k random single: 124/372 IOPS
4k random multi (32): 135/305 IOPS

Toshiba:
Read / write
Sequential: 108090/107226 kb / s
4k random single: 104/78 IOPS
4k random multi (32): 105/68 IOPS

The transfer rates of WD are for large files so minimal (<5%) better.
But when writing very many small files it has enormous benefits.

So who copied large files, which can theoretically save the extra for the WD.
When copying many small files but whatever takes an eternity, you can save with the WD bit of time.

Edit 2013-08-09:
In the meantime, the price of WD on Toshiba level. The two plates take priced so nothing more.
The great advantage of the Toshiba is no longer available. Therefore, a clear recommendation for WD.