However, while SSDs may offer larger storage sizes and higher speeds, Seagate's new hard drives definitely win out on price. The 5TB BarraCuda ST5000 will cost $85, while the laptop-sized 2TB BarraCuda ST2000LM015 will cost $55. No release dates for the hard drives have been announced.
Not sure why you believe that, I've been using Seagate for many years, and never had trouble with their 2.5" drives
for the regular 3.5" only had to replace 3 of different sizes (1.5TB, 3TB), both of them died just days before the 5 years expiry date of the warranty, their RMA process is easy and painless, only 1 drive expired the warranty of 5 years, so well obviously they will not replace that one. (2 TB)
of these new 2.5" drives, I've got a bunch of them for my home server I'm using 8x 2TB 2.5" version they run nice, no issues so far *** knocks on wood ***
Seagate actually has better reliability than WD these days, the seagate failure numbers from backblaze a few years ago were because of a single model they shucked from external hdd's.
Whenever you read about this sort of release it somehow never seems to reach any stores. I'm sure they sold a couple through some unknown source as a sort of paper release to say "look! 85$ for 5 TB" as a sort of advertising. But the stuff you find on newegg or amazon is all the same old same old for regular prices.
The BarraCuda ST5000 pushes the capacity limit from the previous 4TB to 5TB, and will be priced around $85. Seagate says the drive uses the company's 1TB-per-platter design that it unveiled at CES in January 2016. The same drive is also available in 4TB and 3TB models.
All are 5,400rpm drives with 128MB of cache and a two-year warranty. Power consumption is rated at 2.1 watts under load and 1.1 watts while idle.
Almost seems ironic that Linus put out a video on why Seagate's archive drives are bad, with that price, though, I don't see why it wouldn't be based on the same thing.
Not so much brand as the size here. Anything above 1TB for HDDs has a high fail rate I don't care what you say. They are jamming lots platters and junk into a small space....lots can go wrong and probably will.
Seagate actually has better reliability than WD these days, the seagate failure numbers from backblaze a few years ago were because of a single model they shucked from external hdd's.
Those that have been tech people for a sufficiently long period of time will certainly recognize that Seagate's problems have existed across many models over many years. They certainly have decent models but they also have stellar, record-setting failures. Their outliers are just more extreme than most manufacturers'. I wouldn't trust a Seagate drive of any newly launched model to be the sole store of something important.
Those that have been tech people for a sufficiently long period of time will certainly recognize that Seagate's problems have existed across many models over many years. They certainly have decent models but they also have stellar, record-setting failures. Their outliers are just more extreme than most manufacturers'. I wouldn't trust a Seagate drive of any newly launched model to be the sole store of something important.
Those that have been tech people for a sufficiently long period of time will certainly recognize that Seagate's problems have existed across many models over many years. They certainly have decent models but they also have stellar, record-setting failures. Their outliers are just more extreme than most manufacturers'. I wouldn't trust a Seagate drive of any newly launched model to be the sole store of something important.
I'll wait and see how they do in general consumer reviews with more testing. I would love 4 of these to replace my mismatched extra storage drives. 2 stand alone drives, and 2 in RAID 1 for some projects I'd like to work on.
Those that have been tech people for a sufficiently long period of time will certainly recognize that Seagate's problems have existed across many models over many years. They certainly have decent models but they also have stellar, record-setting failures. Their outliers are just more extreme than most manufacturers'. I wouldn't trust a Seagate drive of any newly launched model to be the sole store of something important.
Damn, I'll take it that a decade isn't a sufficiently long time, because I've had no problems with Seagate save for a DOA 7200.12 500GB drive (out of... I've lost the count how many Seagate drives I have 15? 20? something like that).
And on the professional side of things, I've seen Toshiba drives fail more than any others. Samsung, Seagate, Western Digital and Hitachi (both server, desktop and laptop drives) all have similarly low failure rates in my experience. A fair amount of WD Reds in NASes have bid farewell though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by neonlazer
I know right, after having a couple 7200.11's. I will never buy Seagate again.
There has to be a catch. I had 2 out of 3 3TB Seagates fail on me. They worked for ~ 3-4 years. Both showed bad sectors. Saved one because I was able to test it. The second drive passed all the test and then died after 1 month.
i've had consistent reliability problems with their drives in the past, I might get one or 2 to try out, but I would likely backup to a WD brand as well.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Ask a question
Ask a question
Overclock.net
27.8M posts
541.2K members
Since 2004
A forum community dedicated to overclocking enthusiasts and testing the limits of computing. Come join the discussion about computing, builds, collections, displays, models, styles, scales, specifications, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!