Hope you didn't fall for the Western Digital meme.
>once the shitty 1.5/3TB Seagate drives were pushed out of service the failure rate suddenly plummets
>>54618567
>WD has an absolutely tiny sample size compared to the Seagate sample size
I'm not a shill for WD, I have like 4 seagates in my PC, but that's just not a good comparison.
Only two of these samples are relevant for comparison OP
>>54618567
The sample sizes for some brands are not indicative of anything.
I personally use hgst because I've had Hitachi drives literally keep going for a decade
Of course, it had fucktons of reallocated sectors but it just kept working
>>54618567
Cant believe you stupid fucks still post that backblaze bullshits, thinking it's relevant in any way.
>>54618567
>once this batch and that batch and this other batch are not taken into account the numbers aren't as bad!
no thanks
>>54620270
The Seagate data is pretty fucking relevant.
>>54619657
>>54620176
>>54620206
>>54620270
>>54620347
>>54620414
Keep up the good work guys, I think there's going to be a big bonus at the end of the year for the WD viral marketing team.
What drives were failing?
I only buy "premium" ones with 5 year warranty like the Black
>>54620504
>500 sample size vs 25,000 sample size
WD : Nvidia
Seagate : AMD
If you can overlook some glaring faults and be smart about what you buy, you'll find that WD is just a meme, and enjoy better hardware for less. If you want to be sure whatever you buy Just Werks™ you get WD.
And if you take out the shitty WD Greens and Reds you'll find that they're on the same level as HGST.
>d-don't do that o-only we can ignore certain drives
>>54620741
You shouldn't buy greens, reds, blues either way.
Data has become cheap so no excuse you don't buy an Re, Red Pro or Black.
>>54620504
>Pulling the cheapest external drives, putting them in a shitty home-made rack, and hoping every goy believes your made up numbers
>>54618567
> trusting this BS
nah common sense dictates WD drives have better lifespans
Funny considering my seagate 3 TB died just 2 days ago
Never fucking again, WD all the way baby
it's just not muh lifespan, the WD blacks just perform much better and dont freeze every time I try to access the storage
>>54620867
Blue 1TB or smaller is fine.
>>54620504
This "study" was done very poorly, they have massively uneven sample size, and lump ALL drives from a given manufacturer together.
>My argument got BTFO so I call everyone else a shill.
All this is coming from a guy who prefers Seagates.
>>54621020
Because they're actually blues and not rebranded greens.
>not getting WD Gold
It's like you don't even care about your data.
>>54621156
Show me where I can buy it.
>>54620893
>>54621003
>my experience with x is bad, so that means that x is objectively worse than y
Please let this meme die.
>>54620244
This 2bh. My 4TB HGST drives run hotter than my CPU while not playing video games though.
>>54621174
You need to join the top secret WD Gold club.
>>54621174
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822235059
>>54621236
>>54621237
Thanks, last time I checked it wasn't available in the Netherlands yet.
>>54621228
How hot are we talking anon? 50C?
Wasn't Backblaze the one that was buying used HDDs off the internet for these kind of tests?
>>54621101
>lump ALL drives from a given manufacturer together
Really?
>>54621300
Why did the 3TB drives suck so much?
https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-reliability-stats-q1-2016/
>buying shitgate
>ever
>>54621680
I believe it was around the time that all of the hard drive factories got flooded in Thailand.
Even my buggy greens are still alive.
>>54621101
It's not a 'study' since they don't claim it's a study. It's just their data they use to buy new HDDs for their business, made into charts.
>>54621501
Most people on /g/ aren't aware there's more to it than the aggressively shitposted graphs.
>>54621725
>buying 3tb drives
Their other models are fine retard
>>54621505
Those are normal temps, above 50C is a problem though.
>>54621762
Their 4TB is the one with the most faults you blind tardshit.
>>54621505
What case do you have? You should invest in some high pressure fans to get air to them
>>54621794
The X model is a hybrid drive with ssd cache
The M model is a standard drive with a much lower failure rate
>>54621753
https://www.backblaze.com/blog/what-hard-drive-should-i-buy/
>Some drives just don’t work in the Backblaze environment. We have not included them in this study.
Kekblaze even refers to it as a 'study' themselves, nigger.
>>54621849
So SSDs are meme?
>>54621889
Not really, more like SSHDs are meme.
>>54621889
No, but if you make things more complicated there are more ways for something to fail
I've never been a fan of hybrid drives for this reason
Standard SSDs are very reliable
>>54621501
>trying to defend this terribly put together study.
Just stop, the WD sample size is way too small to make an accurate comparison to Seagate.
>>54618567
>home nas is all deskstars
Two failures in 4 years. 12TB useable raid 5.
>>54618567
>once the shitty 1.5/3TB Seagate drives were pushed out of service the failure rate suddenly plummets
but what you're doing now is comparing segate drives without a particular manufacturing problem to exclusively wd red drives which evidently do have a manufacturing problem, good job
>>54621680
>Why did the 3TB drives suck so much?
they were pushed to market around the time the harddrive factories were flooded and they were a new technology so most manufacturers probably had shitty temporary factories setup
in segates particular case they probably knowingly put out a bunch of 3tb drives with awful failure rates to recoup some losses, no other manufacturer had quite as bad 3tb drives as segate did
>>54621753
>It's not a 'study' since they don't claim it's a study. It's just their data they use to buy new HDDs for their business, made into charts.
they even claim it's not an ideal comparison because they're using decidedly consumer grade drives in a professional enterprise environment i.e., high heat, high vibrations, maximum throughput
>>54621753
>implying the graphs aren't a brief summation of the study
I bet you failed statistics class.
>>54622006
>WD Red
>high vibrations
That explains the failure rate.
>>54621954
What about HGST you dipshit
The data on WD isn't enough to judge it but for HGST it is. And it's way lower then Seagate.
Therefore Seagate is shit.
isn't HGST just a re branded WD?
>>54622179
HGST seems to be bleeding edge WD.
>>54622179
WD now owns HGST, but I haven't heard anything about a change in quality
I put together a build for a client a few months ago that used a 2TB Hitachi drive and no issues so far
>>54622222
Check'd!
>>54622121
Maybe one person in this thread mentioned HGST, mongoloid.
Everyone was more concerned with WD vs Seagate.
>2016
>STILL falling for the backblaze meme
>>54621101
> study done poorly
> nice enough to give their info
>>54620582
Are the WD blacks still the king?
Ive been hearing mixed things on current batches. I've been debating on buying a new 1TB. I have a black now, and it works solidly.
>>54622179
No. They had their own designs before the merge, and continue to do so. Except the new gold, which is a rebranded hgst helium.
7200rpm is a deal breaker to me
I got myself WD 3TB and then Seagate 4tb and then returned it and went for WD 3TB since its the quietest one I ever had
I wanned to have different manufacturers and models but I ultra quiet rigg, most of you would not notice, but I am sensitive to that and at night it gets rather quiet around here...
I guess Im just lucky I've never had a WD shit out on me. I have a 600 GB Black that's been running flawlessly for more than a decade.
How are Hitachi drives now a days? Thinking about getting a 2tb one.
>>54622636
for performance they're pretty good, I've got a 1TB black for >muh games, it can do about 160MB/s
>>54623034
always get ultrastars, I've had the same 2tb ultrastar for 6 years and there's no signs of it quitting
>>54620893
Common sense would be to believe the evidence provided rather than following gut feelings and personal biases. We are human though so it is not always so simple.
>>54622264
And you were calling the whole study shit. Which it isn't.
>moving goalposts
>you're doing it
>>54623272
>evidence provided
Only the reds, which aren't meant for places with a lot of vibration.
>had a hitachi
>died horribly, literally popping through the case
>had a seagate
>that lasted only a few years too
>Have WD's
>still going strong
I don't care what the graph says, I'll believe it when I see it.
>>54618567
>tfw 3 seagates in raid 0
Yolo
>>54624264
>have had 4 total WD drives, 3 were scorpio (2.5 inch)
>2 scorpios die after about 3 years of service each
>1 scorpio going strong after 3 years with no end in sight
>1TB 3.5 inch drive is the same after 2 years
I'm a little mixed
>>54623701
Yes, it is a shit study, and you are a fool for believing Backblazes marketing efforts. Do I agree with it? Yes.
HGST>WD>Toshiba>pen paper>Seagate in my book, desu
>>54618567
My WD black drive from 4 years ago still works fine even after some hard PC drops, while an external seagate drive I bought died within a year for no reason, was 3TB, if only I had known at the time. it's now a $125 dollar brick
1tb WD black 5 years old, still running
3tb WD black 4 years old, still running.
What the fuck do you do to kill your HDDs so fast?
I constantly fill and delete these and they still run without any issues.
>>54626486
Got 2 2tb Seagates that are 3 and 5 years old still going strong
Should I buy greens for backups or is that just a meme?
