I'm going to guess that "nobody" here can answer because "everybody" here is using surveillance drives instead of general drives. Is the surveillance drive actually better for the job, or is the only difference the color of the label? After pondering the issue, I gave in and ordered a 3TB drive with the purple label.
General drives *can* perform adequately if your recorder is clever about how it schedules writes. Most good VMS will create one massive file or several massive files on the disk, map those so it knows how the file is allocated and then schedules writes to minimise head movement. These work really well with most drives regardless of persuasion although seeking and playback can be a bit choppy on slower drives. Other VMS, not so much. VMS that record separate clips are even worse as over a period of time the drive gets highly fragmented as clips are written and deleted. Filesystems in general are not geared to cope with files being constantly deleted and written without pretty bad fragmentation. Preallocation helps a lot here, but most budget VMS don't go that far.
The other main issue is error recovery. Purple and Red drives have SCT/ERC where the drive returns quickly after encountering a bad sector (where quickly seems to default to about 7 seconds). A general desktop drive can take in excess of 120 seconds and during that time appears to be properly dead. Not even bus resets sort them out. Windows does not like that, and I've not seen what a cheap NVR does in those conditions.
Honestly it depends on what you are using to record with, your usage pattern and what your expectations are, so there is no hard and fast answer. For the budget stuff that seems to get discussed here (Chinese NVRs &
Blue Iris) I'd be using a surveillance drive just for the error recovery and extra warranty over and above a desktop drive. I've certainly recorded to a RAID6 of WD Green drives for years, but that's not a normal use-case and I was using enterprise VMSs running in VMs.