View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
ggrobot Elite Member
Joined: 28 May 2004 Posts: 45468
|
Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2016 10:33 pm Post subject: Hard Drive Stats for Q3 2016: Less is More [42241] |
|
|
Here's is the hard drive failure data for Q3 2016. This chart is just for the period of Q3 2016. The hard drive models listed below are data drives, not boot drives. We only list drive models that have 45 or more of that model deployed.
Read more...
Source: GGMania headlines
GGMania.com - Daily Gaming and Tech news |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Csimbi Elite Member
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 Posts: 4769 Location: The bright side of the dark side
|
Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2016 12:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Wow. WD-branded drives seem to suck these day.
I used to invest in WD drives when I was young because they were the best at the time.
Then came HGST - which is still WD under a different brand - I have never bought anything else since. I have about 100Tb in total in my NASes. (due to RAID6 and mirroring, the usable space is less than half).
The age of the drives vary between 8years and 2years.
It's good to see that the figures are proving me right.
One thing though: some of these drives have very little volumes.
We'd need to see >10k drives of each model to make it comparable; some of these volumes are practically zero. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mojoman Contributing Member
Joined: 14 Jan 2011 Posts: 90
|
Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2016 2:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And I thought Seagate were the best! When I used to repair PCs (15 years ago), WD were my HD of choice. Then a friend who works in TI said Seagate were the real deal. It had rubber around the case and supposedly a decent warranty against impacts.
BlackBlaze is doing a great job providing this info. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Csimbi Elite Member
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 Posts: 4769 Location: The bright side of the dark side
|
Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2016 2:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
<deleted duplicate message which was a consequence of Firefox crash recovery>
Last edited by Csimbi on Mon Nov 21, 2016 3:06 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Csimbi Elite Member
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 Posts: 4769 Location: The bright side of the dark side
|
Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2016 2:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Seagate provided decent HDs for the price.
HGST drives cost much more than Seagate drives (at least, they used to) so we are comparing 1st class apples to 2nd class apples. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tom Elite Member
Joined: 07 Jun 2004 Posts: 4186
|
Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2016 3:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Seagate's were never the best drive. In fact WD and Hitachi/IBM Deskstars long held the reputation they were the best. Seagates were more affordable thus why people bought them. When I built PC's for people I always recommended WD but everyone swooped to Seagate to save. Sadly all my drives are Seagate but then I haven't had any failure with them so I consider myself lucky. My NAS is all Seagate. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
gx-x Elite Member
Joined: 02 Jul 2007 Posts: 2538
|
Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2016 7:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
how much do you save on HDD when building a whole PC? Price differences (if we look at 1-2 HDDs per PC) is negligible. I am not talking about specific brands here but consumer drivers are all usually within +- 10$ difference at best.
Personally, I had a lot of Seagates, one was a bad apple. Didn't loose data, but would eventually. I swapped it for a Hitachi that died after 3 years (started corrupting data). I opted for Seagate again and it was actually the pricier choice than WD. What I dislike about Seagate is no AAM control...Anyway, running Seagate DM003 series for almost 2 years now, not a single problem so far. Pretty quick drives. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tom Elite Member
Joined: 07 Jun 2004 Posts: 4186
|
Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2016 8:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
gx-x wrote: | how much do you save on HDD when building a whole PC? Price differences (if we look at 1-2 HDDs per PC) is negligible. I am not talking about specific brands here but consumer drivers are all usually within +- 10$ difference at best.
Personally, I had a lot of Seagates, one was a bad apple. Didn't loose data, but would eventually. I swapped it for a Hitachi that died after 3 years (started corrupting data). I opted for Seagate again and it was actually the pricier choice than WD. What I dislike about Seagate is no AAM control...Anyway, running Seagate DM003 series for almost 2 years now, not a single problem so far. Pretty quick drives. |
Back when people cared about SB Live cards or nicer mouse or investing in a slightly better screen, they cared. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|