Backblaze "What Hard Drive Should I Buy?"

Discussion in 'Storage & Backup' started by Vladdo, Jan 22, 2014.

  1. Vladdo

    Vladdo Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Messages:
    8,501
    Location:
    Laverton, Melbourne
  2. tiro_uspsss

    tiro_uspsss Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,437
    nothing new here! :lol: :thumbup:
     
  3. shadowman

    shadowman Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2003
    Messages:
    2,749
    Location:
    Perth
    Keep in mind, the 1.5 and 3TB seagates are the older models with 7200.11 firmware with known issues. You also have to question if Hitachi are really that much better, given they are owned by WD, there'd be no reason to really segregate the market, other than the fact Hitachi are more for enterprise and WD for consumer.

    I'll take it with a grain of salt, albeit it's a fairly large sample size, it's still anecdotal evidence, hard drives go through dozens of revisions/firmware over the lifespan of a single generation.
     
  4. Soarer GT

    Soarer GT Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2007
    Messages:
    2,701
    Location:
    Melbourne
    But as a consumer, you shouldnt be the guinea pig that tests firmware for them. When you buy a HDD, you expect it to work at least 3 years. Not fail every year while they fix their firmware.
     
  5. terrastrife

    terrastrife Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2006
    Messages:
    18,418
    Location:
    ADL/SA The Monopoly State
    This was fixed 5 years ago, who buys 1.5s anyway?

    Anything new will have problems, if we didn't 'beta' test in the real world nothing would ever be released.
     
  6. greenhawk

    greenhawk Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2003
    Messages:
    789

    it is worth noting though that the wd buying of Hitachi was early 2012. The drives in the graph where bought over 3 years ago. But I do agree, going forwards makes it hard to look back when deciding.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HGST
     
  7. mtma

    mtma Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    4,735
    Actually back in the days of the 7200.11 series, Seagate would have wanted you to believe you could expect 5 years of life from their drives. Oh how quickly that was dropped.

    It's amazing to think that Seagate originally started the 5 year consumer drive warranty movement.
     
  8. terrastrife

    terrastrife Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2006
    Messages:
    18,418
    Location:
    ADL/SA The Monopoly State
    None of my 7200.11s died, all 12 or so, well out of their 5 year warranty now.
     
  9. EvilGenius

    EvilGenius Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2005
    Messages:
    10,176
    Location:
    Rocky
    Also worth noting that although WD bought hitachi, the HDD division went to toshiba, and the drives coming from them are identical to the drives that came from hitachi before hand. They literally stamped Toshiba on them and continued selling them.
     
  10. Dilbery

    Dilbery Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2005
    Messages:
    1,034
    Location:
    Sydney, NSW
    Touch wood but none of the Seagate's I've brought over the past few years have died, every WD however is a different story (a few of the guys at work have had them also die)
     
  11. Reginald85

    Reginald85 Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2006
    Messages:
    295
    Location:
    Bendigo
    ^^^ What this guy said.
     
  12. de_overfiend

    de_overfiend Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2001
    Messages:
    2,190
    Location:
    Gold Coast
    I have found that in general (and this is only from my own experiences - no way a real world measure of reliability) when a pc comes into our shop with a failed hdd its a WD drive. approx 50% WD, 15% Hitachi, 15% toshiba, 10% seagate and 10% other brands.

    We have a large pile of dead WDs to prove it.

    Also when a WD drive fails its usually a complete fail clunking or unreadable or just wont spin up making software data recovery impossible.

    We have a customer at the moment that is paying Kroll Ontrack ~ $1400 for data recovery from a 1tb WD green drive, and only retreiving half of their data due to internal physical damage that the drive caused to itself. It was in a HP all in one and was approx 3 years old. Needless to say we replaced it with a seagate.

    had a p4 come in the other day with a 40gb seagate barracuda ide drive (the ones with the rubber around them) still running strong.

    In saying that, most externals that come in have failed no matter what brand. Usually from being dropped while running.

    Also we must remember that im pretty sure that WD and Seagate have a large proportion of the market when it comes to sales, so its natural to see a large number of failures compared to the amount of drives in circulation
     
  13. Gaidin

    Gaidin Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    1,952
    Location:
    Vic
    Based on the hundred or so hard drives I've had over the last few years (obviously less than you'd see in a retail store :)) I would say my experience is about the same. In the last 18 months I've sent back 2 Hitachis and 1 Seagate.
     
  14. shadowman

    shadowman Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2003
    Messages:
    2,749
    Location:
    Perth
    If we're going to get into personal anecdotal evidence, then my experience backs up what you're saying. We have a 25 PC office, split 50/50 Seagate and WD greens, and the shelf in my server room is full of WD green drives, with zero Seagates.
     
  15. Butcher9_9

    Butcher9_9 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    Messages:
    2,051
    Location:
    Perth , East Vic Park
    1.5TBs always where pretty bad (from All vendors). As they did not have any 1.5Tb WDs to compare its hard to call it a complete view of the situation .

    I have found that 2TB Seagate are a lot less reliable in raid than the newer 4TBs which is supported by their data.
     
  16. terrastrife

    terrastrife Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2006
    Messages:
    18,418
    Location:
    ADL/SA The Monopoly State
    people should read the tweaktown article too :p
     
  17. stebie

    stebie Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    235
    Location:
    Western Subs, VIC
  18. Skitza

    Skitza Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2001
    Messages:
    3,743
    Location:
    In your street
  19. Soarer GT

    Soarer GT Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2007
    Messages:
    2,701
    Location:
    Melbourne
    I'm more inclined to err on the side of caution with the Blackblaze article and consider the Tweaktown article grasping at straws. Questioning Temps and operating environments?

    I'm 99% sure anything in a Datacentre is
    a) cooler than my room.
    b) cleaner than my room.
    c) vibration interference of being in a rack of that density shouldnt be a "drawback" I see it as a sign of drive integrity and manufacturers taking short cuts in design if they cant handle a non-ideal environment. I want to know that I can have a number of HDDs stacked together in a Norco without high failure rates.

    Even if you take out the "catastrophic failure rate" of Seagate, the fact that they dont drop straight away is a pain in the ass. At least with the Hitachi's, they either die within 24 hours or work for at least 3 years. Having drives die 6 months later in a workstation is 20x worse than having it drop during burn in phase.
     
  20. stebie

    stebie Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    235
    Location:
    Western Subs, VIC
    Not sure if it got misinterpreted, I should've said, I wasn't agreeing with Tweaktown's take.

    +1

    That said, everyone's going to have their own experiences with hard drives. We've seen it before. Person A will see more WD drives die than Seagates. Person B will see more Seagate drives die than WDs.

    Instead of TT refuting BB's results with nothing to back it up, they should conduct their own thorough study and use those results (most likely they can't therefore won't).
     

Share This Page