Seagate 4TB

I have a regular customer who does lab data recovery.
He hates WD, worst HDD manufacturer according to him.
Guy always buys Seagate for himself.
WD according to him means "wird durchbrennen", basically translates to will burn.

There is a reason why WD renamed the green series to a second blue one as they had to get rid of that name after it became the same as garbage for harddrives.

trying to determine which make or model of drive is more reliable is a fool's game. Any drive of any model from any manufacturer can die at any time with no warning, be prepared for it. Given that you have to use backups and redundancy anyway, but whatever is cheapest per terabyte.

I've had issues with Samsung and Hitachi but never WD.

Just go with whatever you want. I've used WD, Seagate, Hitachi, Adata, Toshiba, Fujitsu, etc, and none are particularly better than others - as long as you're not like comparing an entry-level economy drive to like a 10K RPM Raptor or anything like that.

All drives have issues, it's basically luck of the draw as to whether yours will or not. Back up your shit anyway and you'll be sweet.

If you can afford to lose the data on it, sounds like a fine option. If losing the data would cause you grief, google the failure rates. I haven't checked for a while but HGST drives had very low failure rates way back when.

WD currently has the biggest fail rate

>If losing the data would cause you grief, google the failure rates
No you fucking mouth-breathing retard, if losing the data would cause you grief, you buy MORE THAN ONE FUCKING DRIVE AND YOU MAKE FUCKING BACKUPS

Morons like you show up all the time with dead drives and lost data because "but I thought WD/HGST/Seagate/whoever was good, not like those other guys..."

Source?

Calm your tits. I didn't tell him not to take backups.

He's right. WD is fucking garbage. Seagate had 1 bad drive from 3tb that failed non stop. That's it. WD has always been trash.
Hgst & toshiba are both better

Same company that gave you the wrong data about Seagate having the biggest fail because they only had 2 types of drives.
thenextweb.com/insider/2016/02/17/56224-hard-drives-later-backblaze-finds-western-digital-disks-most-likely-to-fail/
Anyone who thinks they fail the most is no better than the anti vax idiots who cling to a fake science report that was debunked, and who's author was thrown out

>"I know his house burned down, but I didn't tell him not to install sprinklers and smoke alarms..."
You dhouldn't be omitting that. Because it's more important to drive into the heads of people at every opportunity that drives die, and that if you only have your data on one of them, no matter what brand it is or what backblaze measured the failure rate as, you're going to wind up losing shit. You're encouraging people to focus on shit that matters little or not at all (selecting a reliable brand) and ignoring the shit that should be up front and fucking center in every discussion of storing things, which is "drives die, back up your shit".

Don't waffle about with unimportant bullshit about drive brands just because that's what OP wants to hear about. Tell him he's full of shit and that he needs to get more than one drive and use redundancy and backups if he wants to keep his data.

does the shit quality of a drive like this matter at all if you're just using it for cold storage? maybe accessing it once or twice a year.

Just go with what ever is cheapest, they all fail.
I've lost two WD black 1TB and 1 WD refurbished 500GB which was 1 out of 3 500GB WD Blues that were bought at the same time, just this year. One of the WD blacks was in a server and didn't make it to it's daily GFS backup so almost 1 day of data of lost, not too much of a biggy.
The head parking has got a lot worse on the WDs in recent years, my 1 year old WD Blue 4TB is in caution state but because I bought it from a bulk drive OEM I can't RMA it personally. I've moved the data to another drive and relegated it to thrash/BT duty.

Only Seagates I have left are a couple 500GB from yesteryears, and a recently bought 8TB because the White/Red labeled WDs don't have very good failure rates atm.

I have a 3TB and a 4TB Toshiba, no problems so far, made it through their 3 year warranty with no problems. Don't touch the external 2.5" Toshibas though, soldered USB 3.0 port, failed right out of it's 1 yr warranty. The largest drive they sell locally here are 6TB which is why I went with Seagate for the 8TB. Toshiba drives are pretty loud and run hotter than the other drives even though they are active cooled maybe because they have less platter density and more platters.

HGST is WD now, "as of October 19, 2015, HGST is a Western Digital brand, and no longer a separate entity."

>you buy MORE THAN ONE FUCKING DRIVE AND YOU MAKE FUCKING BACKUPS
Is it autistic to buy them at different times or from different outlets (newegg vs amazon for example) to get different manufacturing batches and reduce the chance of simultaneous failure? Or is it an actually useful idea?

>1% difference
sssssheeeeeeeit, steer clear folks

Attached: 1527616140794.jpg (297x297, 13K)

No, some guides for ZFS/MD-RAID/Btrfs explicitly recommend getting different drive models if you can, for exactly this reason.

Had a lot of problems with their 4TB sas drives so I can’t imagine the shitty home low power one is better. Roughly a 5% yearly failure rate across 1000 drives. Lots of DOA replacements too.

Likely a worthless precaution but fuck it. My reccomendation is to have a 3tb drive that's used only for back ups and otherwise is rarely used.

>HGST still best
No surprise here

My 3TB seagate meme drive works flawlessly to this day. Of course this doesn't mean it's not a shit drive with incredible failure rate. Now that WD has HGST in the bag I think we'll see improvements on the 8TB+ drives as they seem to be hitachi tech on both WD Gold and HGST Ultrastar. The linked article is pretty old and backblaze didn't really use the new helium drives back then. We'll have better data in 1-2 more years. Consumer drives will probably keep being shit on the WD front.
I've given seagate yet another chance by buying a 10tb enterprise drive let's hope it'll survive at least the 5 years during the warranty.

Yes but we're comparing their 30% difference in last post

It's not guaranteed to fail because it's meme 3tb. I bought 8 for a company only 2 have failed. It's been what,6 years?

They were a faulty batch

mine failed after a month
PIPELINE == SCAM

Attached: Screen Shot 2018-09-06 at 7.28.15 PM.png (1818x530, 168K)

Cuz Seagate sold all the drives that got fucking flooded lol

Yeah I know and kind of implied it. Really only replying to check these quads senpai.

Oh damn. I guess my quads speak truth

I have had three of these for the past 6-ish years. They're pretty good, obviously not as fast as the 7200rpm ones. Would recommend.

There is nothing wrong but you should know that at around this size, drives become slower on the write speeds because of using SMR (shingled magnetic recording) which means the magnetic diskettes that are used inside the hard drive are stacked like tiles on a roof, and hence the name, and the way it works causes it to slow down.

SSDs are cheap these days, where the prices are now as cheap as how expensive HDDs were over a decade ago so if you are not doing storage, don't use hard drives at all if you can help it.

>he fell for the 4TB meme

>portable seagate slim 2tb
>stopped working
>open it
>samsung hard drive inside
what do they mean by this?

>2018
>spinning rust

Hi grandpa.

Hi zoomer

Only buy 5 year warranty Seagate drives.

As long as it's Ironwolf model your fine. Ironwolfes are one of the best drives.

as a torrenting hdd that's absolutely fine

What dumb shit post is this. Buy him a 4tb SSD if that's what you're going to recommend

>dismissing valid concerns about SMR and PMR hard drive write speeds with "shitpost"

It's a valid concern to have, because if he was going to use the 4TB in a NAS or even as a system drive, it would be absolutely shit tier if any data has to be rewritten at all in a write heavy or random data burst because of the shingled tracks covering the write tracks and everything would slow down to a crawl, which is why the industry came up with dedicated NAS drives and archive drives are tiered differently. Anything other than a write once read many scenario is where the drive sucks and in a write once read many scenario, an SSD drive/RAID would be better on all fronts except cost.

And I wonder why I even bother posting anymore when idiots rule supreme and consistently run their mouths on topics they don't on this board...

If you're writing a billion GB to your NAS you're probably restoring from backup or something and this will be a rare operation that can be left overnight if needed. For normal usage if write speed is such an important bottleneck a 120GB ssd for $30 used as write cache should eliminate all problems, but nobody is gonna buy fucking terabytes of SSDs for actual backing storage.

>i have four seagate 8tbs and they've been running 24/7 since last year

Powered on 24/7 is not the same thing as constant database reads rights 24/7.

A consumer drive wont last 5 years in a volcano temp server with inadequate cooling that has CONSTANT 24/7 small reads AND writes and not enough cache to pick up slack.

How heavily were you using the drives?

>thumbstick

my god, and I thought "zip disquette" was pushing it

Attached: 1535112921648.png (739x697, 109K)

keep in mind paying extra for 5 years warranty can help a lot.

Literally nothing wrong with that. Better than "thumb drive" and that's classified as mid-tier according to you.

I've been using the same HDD on my desktop for around 8 years straight and it hasn't failed once. I don't even know the brand. I hope it doesn't die any soon because I have no backups. Tempting Death has never felt so exciting

Attached: aicolonel.png (135x196, 54K)

They riced your HDD for (you)

you'll be fine user, just suck it and see.

Nothing wrong with Seagate.

This explains why the only "Seagates" I've had die on me were external.

Attached: 1518681238598.jpg (500x380, 58K)

apparently, this version of 2tb slim portable had high failure rate based on other users. sadly I had a couple. 1 needed RMA, the other one died.