Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [The Register] Seagate’s triple whammy: Disk numbers, costs, and flash
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[The Register] Seagate’s triple whammy: Disk numbers, costs, and flash - Page 6

post #51 of 88
Lol, every HDD/SSD news thread turns into this.
post #52 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by DzillaXx View Post

Seagate has had extremely high failure rates for the last decade.

Even the Internet agrees.


If there is one manufacture to avoid buying from in terms of HDD reliability, it is Seagate.


There is a reason why they don't pack on a decent warranty onto their HDD's. They also sell their drives at a lower price point, so people don't take the loss of their HDD 2-3 years down the road as hard.

WD Green HDD's are by far WD's worst in terms of reliability, and still they look good compared to some of those Seagate Drives. tongue.gif

I've exclusively used Seagate for a while now. The failure rate is a bit too high, especially on certain models. Going WD for my next hard drive.
Edited by warr10r - 1/31/16 at 4:06am
post #53 of 88
strangely though i have been using kingston ssdnow V300 (LSI SandForce controller) for 4 years as primary, before that i used seagates barracudas for 10 years

i have currently 2 2TB seagates (newer is green but its 5yo i think), that i use as external storage, plus a samsung 2TB external smaller drive, so they dont get used that much

did their quality went down the drain in last 4 years? because i use them just as data storage and i dont have them turned on for longer than an hour or so

thank you
post #54 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by revro View Post

strangely though i have been using kingston ssdnow V300 (LSI SandForce controller) for 4 years as primary, before that i used seagates barracudas for 10 years

i have currently 2 2TB seagates (newer is green but its 5yo i think), that i use as external storage, plus a samsung 2TB external smaller drive, so they dont get used that much

did their quality went down the drain in last 4 years? because i use them just as data storage and i dont have them turned on for longer than an hour or so

thank you

Well most people would say so but it is not as easy as that.
Even big studies like the Backblaze study are not a reliable source. Their racks were pretty awful as it seems and no one can tell which drives were used in which racks..
Anyways seagate has not a failure rate of 10-20% like it seems because otherwise they would be dead already..

I have also the feeling seagate has a worse reputation than WD or hitachi in forums. But is it a good testimony? You can't be certain.

Personally I don't trust Seagate but at the same time Im very happy with WD and there is no reason to buy seagate HDDs.
As long as you have a great experience with seagate and you have a backup, no matter what brand it is, you are good to go. That being said WD is a very good choice aswell if you are unsure about seagate.
Vinyl Scratch
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 - 3770k Asus P8Z77 - V PRO Gigabyte GTX 780 windforce 3XOC G. Skill F3-106660CL17-4GBXH 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 840 Pro Series SSD 2x WD RED 1 TB Raid 1 Corsair H100i GTX Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2414H TERRA 6236 (23,6") CM Storm Ultimate MX blue Corsair AX760 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
NZXT Switch 810 Logitech G400 Steelseries (Sc2 Zeratul) Beyerdynamic 770 DT Pro 250 Ohm 
Audio
Asus Xonar Essence ST 
  hide details  
Reply
Vinyl Scratch
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 - 3770k Asus P8Z77 - V PRO Gigabyte GTX 780 windforce 3XOC G. Skill F3-106660CL17-4GBXH 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 840 Pro Series SSD 2x WD RED 1 TB Raid 1 Corsair H100i GTX Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2414H TERRA 6236 (23,6") CM Storm Ultimate MX blue Corsair AX760 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
NZXT Switch 810 Logitech G400 Steelseries (Sc2 Zeratul) Beyerdynamic 770 DT Pro 250 Ohm 
Audio
Asus Xonar Essence ST 
  hide details  
Reply
post #55 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandora51 View Post

Even big studies like the Backblaze study are not a reliable source. Their racks were pretty awful as it seems and no one can tell which drives were used in which racks..

Sure you can...

Just run this against all your servers:
Code:
hdparm -I /dev/sda | grep 'Model\|Serial\|Firmware'
Once again...
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 [4.28GHz, HT] Asus P6T + Broadcom NetXtreme II VisionTek HD5850 [900/1200] + Galaxy GT240 2x4GB G.Skill Ripjaw X [1632 MHz] 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Intel X25-M 160GB + 3xRAID0 500GB 7200.12 Window 7 Pro 64 Acer H243H + Samsung 226BW XARMOR-U9BL  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Antec Truepower New 750W Li Lian PC-V2100 [10x120mm fans] Logitech G9 X-Trac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
Once again...
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 [4.28GHz, HT] Asus P6T + Broadcom NetXtreme II VisionTek HD5850 [900/1200] + Galaxy GT240 2x4GB G.Skill Ripjaw X [1632 MHz] 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Intel X25-M 160GB + 3xRAID0 500GB 7200.12 Window 7 Pro 64 Acer H243H + Samsung 226BW XARMOR-U9BL  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Antec Truepower New 750W Li Lian PC-V2100 [10x120mm fans] Logitech G9 X-Trac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #56 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by chinesekiwi View Post

You can look at WD's reviews on Newegg...same stuff really. HDD failures are FAR more to do with the chassis environment.

The WD drives I look at dont have the same amount, From what ive seen, WD has mostly 5 and 4 star and some 1-3, while seagate tend to have like 50-60% five star, and the rest spread pretty evenly between 4-1star.


I mean just look at these two, all I did was search seagate 1TB and WD 1TB. Within 500 reviews of eachother:

http://www.amazon.com/Seagate-Desktop-3-5-Inch-Internal-ST1000DM003/dp/B005T3GRNW/ref=sr_1_1?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1454257634&sr=1-1&keywords=seagate+1TB

20% of reviews rate 2 or less stars.

http://www.amazon.com/Blue-Desktop-Hard-Disk-Drive/dp/B0088PUEPK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1454257642&sr=8-1&keywords=western+digital+1TB

Only 7% of reviews rate 2 or less stars.
Edited by Bryst - 1/31/16 at 8:29am
post #57 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liranan View Post

6TB HD's are cheaper than a 2TB SSD. Until SSD's come down to HD prices HD's will continue to be used and will have a place in systems. I definitely will not replace all my HD's with SSD's as I have other priorities.

It will be about five years before the price of a high quality SSD of equal capacity reaches equal price for HDDs. Even then, HDDs will be used in the enterprise setting for many years to come.

That said, I have lost plenty of HDDs with most of them being Seagate. I have yet to lose a WD drive yet. I have several WD red 3TB, 6TB, green 4TB and black 4TB. All work great as a multiple backup system to raid 0 SSD configurations.
RZA
(29 items)
 
GZA
(28 items)
 
Ol' Dirty Bastard
(32 items)
 
  hide details  
Reply
RZA
(29 items)
 
GZA
(28 items)
 
Ol' Dirty Bastard
(32 items)
 
  hide details  
Reply
post #58 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dagamus NM View Post

It will be about five years before the price of a high quality SSD of equal capacity reaches equal price for HDDs. Even then, HDDs will be used in the enterprise setting for many years to come.

How do you figure? NAND has reached it's lithographical limits on planar architecture. While 3D implementations will help increase density and lower costs, it won't be at the same rate.

With HAMR and Patterned-Media, HDD density should scale up to maybe 30TB per drive in a decade.

It is not SSDs are not expected to hit a $/GB cost parity with HDDs for probably 10+ years. By that time, hopefully NAND's replacement would have broken through to become mainstream.
Once again...
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 [4.28GHz, HT] Asus P6T + Broadcom NetXtreme II VisionTek HD5850 [900/1200] + Galaxy GT240 2x4GB G.Skill Ripjaw X [1632 MHz] 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Intel X25-M 160GB + 3xRAID0 500GB 7200.12 Window 7 Pro 64 Acer H243H + Samsung 226BW XARMOR-U9BL  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Antec Truepower New 750W Li Lian PC-V2100 [10x120mm fans] Logitech G9 X-Trac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
Once again...
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 [4.28GHz, HT] Asus P6T + Broadcom NetXtreme II VisionTek HD5850 [900/1200] + Galaxy GT240 2x4GB G.Skill Ripjaw X [1632 MHz] 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Intel X25-M 160GB + 3xRAID0 500GB 7200.12 Window 7 Pro 64 Acer H243H + Samsung 226BW XARMOR-U9BL  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Antec Truepower New 750W Li Lian PC-V2100 [10x120mm fans] Logitech G9 X-Trac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #59 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuckieHo View Post

How do you figure? NAND has reached it's lithographical limits on planar architecture. While 3D implementations will help increase density and lower costs, it won't be at the same rate.

With HAMR and Patterned-Media, HDD density should scale up to maybe 30TB per drive in a decade.

It is not SSDs are not expected to hit a $/GB cost parity with HDDs for probably 10+ years. By that time, hopefully NAND's replacement would have broken through to become mainstream.

It will be five. Feel free to come back and quote me as wrong. Higher capacity SSDs get cheaper by the day while the 6TB HDDs have not decreased at the same rate. If the trend continues the values will eventually overlap.

I didn't say anything about 10TB, just that we will see continuous increases in ssd density. It may take a form factor increase to get there but ther is plenty of form to gro into for the desktop and server market.
RZA
(29 items)
 
GZA
(28 items)
 
Ol' Dirty Bastard
(32 items)
 
  hide details  
Reply
RZA
(29 items)
 
GZA
(28 items)
 
Ol' Dirty Bastard
(32 items)
 
  hide details  
Reply
post #60 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuckieHo View Post

Sure you can...

Just run this against all your servers:
Code:
hdparm -I /dev/sda | grep 'Model\|Serial\|Firmware'

No what I mean is backblaze has different revisions of racks and some of them are or were terrible. No protection against vibration and such. There was a good article back then from tomshardware.. Need to find it again.
What if most seagate drives failed because the rack and environment was not optimal? At the same time they could have used new revisions for their WD and hitachi drives which would lead into wrong conclusions.
Vinyl Scratch
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 - 3770k Asus P8Z77 - V PRO Gigabyte GTX 780 windforce 3XOC G. Skill F3-106660CL17-4GBXH 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 840 Pro Series SSD 2x WD RED 1 TB Raid 1 Corsair H100i GTX Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2414H TERRA 6236 (23,6") CM Storm Ultimate MX blue Corsair AX760 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
NZXT Switch 810 Logitech G400 Steelseries (Sc2 Zeratul) Beyerdynamic 770 DT Pro 250 Ohm 
Audio
Asus Xonar Essence ST 
  hide details  
Reply
Vinyl Scratch
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 - 3770k Asus P8Z77 - V PRO Gigabyte GTX 780 windforce 3XOC G. Skill F3-106660CL17-4GBXH 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 840 Pro Series SSD 2x WD RED 1 TB Raid 1 Corsair H100i GTX Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2414H TERRA 6236 (23,6") CM Storm Ultimate MX blue Corsair AX760 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
NZXT Switch 810 Logitech G400 Steelseries (Sc2 Zeratul) Beyerdynamic 770 DT Pro 250 Ohm 
Audio
Asus Xonar Essence ST 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [The Register] Seagate’s triple whammy: Disk numbers, costs, and flash