Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
zMeul

BackBlaze - HDD reliability stats for Q2 2015

Recommended Posts

Samsung left the HDD market in 2011.

 

Oh balls, I better be looking at replacing the Spinpoint HDD in my laptop with a SSD soon


Speedtests

WiFi - 7ms, 22Mb down, 10Mb up

Ethernet - 6ms, 47.5Mb down, 9.7Mb up

 

Rigs

Spoiler

 Type            Desktop

 OS              Windows 10 Pro

 CPU             i5-4430S

 RAM             8GB CORSAIR XMS3 (2x4gb)

 Cooler          LC Power LC-CC-97 65W

 Motherboard     ASUS H81M-PLUS

 GPU             GeForce GTX 1060

 Storage         120GB Sandisk SSD (boot), 750GB Seagate 2.5" (storage), 500GB Seagate 2.5" SSHD (cache)

 

Spoiler

Type            Server

OS              Ubuntu 14.04 LTS

CPU             Core 2 Duo E6320

RAM             2GB Non-ECC

Motherboard     ASUS P5VD2-MX SE

Storage         RAID 1: 250GB WD Blue and Seagate Barracuda

Uses            Webserver, NAS, Mediaserver, Database Server

 

Quotes of Fame

On 8/27/2015 at 10:09 AM, Drixen said:

Linus is light years ahead a lot of other YouTubers, he isn't just an average YouTuber.. he's legitimately, legit.

On 10/11/2015 at 11:36 AM, Geralt said:

When something is worth doing, it's worth overdoing.

On 6/22/2016 at 10:05 AM, trag1c said:

It's completely blown out of proportion. Also if you're the least bit worried about data gathering then you should go live in a cave a 1000Km from the nearest establishment simply because every device and every entity gathers information these days. In the current era privacy is just fallacy and nothing more.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

When their first report came out I was in full support of it,  I think I even posted here about it and pointed out why people should accept when the test consists of such a large volume of samples. By the time the second came out I started reading all the blogs and reports from data companies and specialists in the field.  Now the third one has surfaced, literally nothing has changed in BB, more specialists are coming out of the woodwork to criticize their method, less information is available on their setup,  they still have a significant disparity between the number of branded drives and no control grouping.  I subscribe to the notion that if the fish has an odor it's probably off.

 

EDIT: ignore the control grouping, it's not really important for this type of study.

 

you shouldnt be serious on forums when just awake or you end up oing stupid stuff, not for myself.

well with you mentoining this I looked up the Q1 blog results, it's very interesting that the imagie in OP has diffrent failure rates at Q1 2015 compared to the original post in the blackblaze website.

for example, the first 2 drives HGST 7k2000 and HGST 5k3000 show 1.15% failure rate and 0.74% failure rate, while in the original article the rates are 1,66% for the 7k2000 and 0.79% for the 5k3000, for Q1 2015, so I'm not sure what they did or how they did recalculate the valvue's of this, but it seems weird that the numbers changed.

 

link to 2015 Q1 results:

https://www.backblaze.com/blog/best-hard-drive/

 

so far I could find only the WD 4 TB (WDC WD40EFRX) has the same failure rate in Q1 2015

Edited by Bsmith

May the light have your back and your ISO low.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well with you mentoining this I looked up the Q1 blog results, it's very interesting that the imagie in OP has diffrent failure rates at Q1 2015 compared to the original post in the blackblaze website.

for example, the first 2 drives HGST 7k2000 and HGST 5k3000 show 1.15% failure rate and 0.74% failure rate, while in the original article the rates are 1,66% for the 7k2000 and 0.79% for the 5k3000, for Q1 2015, so I'm not sure what they did or how they did recalculate the valvue's of this, but it seems weird that the numbers changed.

 

link to 2015 Q1 results:

https://www.backblaze.com/blog/best-hard-drive/

 

so far I could find only the WD 4 TB (WDC WD40EFRX) has the same failure rate in Q1 2015

 

You were looking at their annual failure rate figures not the figures for the quarter.

 

The first graph is the total average for the year, while the second graph is the quarterly results.


QuicK and DirtY. Read the CoC it's like a guide on how not to be moron.  Also I don't have an issue with the VS series.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You were looking at their annual failure rate figures not the figures for the quarter.

 

The first graph is the total average for the year, while the second graph is the quarterly results.

 

whoops! guess it's still to early for me.


May the light have your back and your ISO low.

Link to post
Share on other sites

whoops! guess it's still to early for me.

 

It happens to the best of us.  


QuicK and DirtY. Read the CoC it's like a guide on how not to be moron.  Also I don't have an issue with the VS series.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i wonder why wd's numbers are worse than hgst's eventhough it's an "wd company."

HGST was bought by WD. They aren't the same thing. It used to be owned by Hitachi. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

-snip-

 

 

-snip-

 

 

-snip-

 

 

The problem is not the method or the data.  The problem is people think this is some kind of study or test.  There is no testing, no studying here.  It is just essentially random numbers released by some company.  They simply state that this is what they use.  Then everyone and their mother thinks it is some kind of professional study done to determine the efficacy of HDD makers.  I will say that the way they put out the data is a bit misleading, but that is mostly for the very purpose that it causes controversy, thus spreading their name around, its basically just free publicity. 

 

The data is not flawed in and of itself.  It is 100% accurate.  The problem is people assume it to mean something it doesn't.  If I released some report about how my company bought mostly Ford trucks and said they spent more time in the shop than any of the other brands; but gave no other data, it would be correct data, but highly misleading.  BackBlaze is purposely doing this because the first time they released these numbers was simply as a cool data point for the IT community and PR reasons.  Then it exploded into a huge controversy and got them tons of free advertising, so they made some fancy graphs and they keep doing it because it keeps exploding.

 

Key things here; it is NOT a study, or a test, or anything like that.  It is simply presented that way to create hype and controversy to spread their name. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, repeatedly.

These idiots pulled 2.5" external drives from their enclosures and ran them 24/7 in a server environment at one point, and published the "data" as if it wasn't worthless.

 

THEY ARE MUPPETS

 

Here's some real, verified data: (Failure rates within warranty periods through French online retailers in 2014)

 

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/255466-huge-list-of-failure-rates-for-all-pc-components/

 

Edit: I should point out that Seagate's 3TB drives have always been awful, I am not refuting that fact.

Yeah that seems more realistic list of percentages.

Though, I have 1TB and 3TB Seagate drive for year and a half and I've been using them for everything; transfer, packing, extracting, recording, editing, many delete, and so on. Even did stuff like while some transfer is going on or something I'd load a game from same drive and minimize that and do something third.

Never experienced any failures or hangs. :)


Ryzen 7 3800X | X570 Aorus Elite | G.Skill 16GB 3200MHz C16 | Radeon RX 5700 XT | Samsung 850 PRO 256GB | Mouse: Zowie S1 | OS: Windows 10

Link to post
Share on other sites

What about Hitachi?

As others have mentioned, Hitachi is on there = HGST - Hitachi Global Storage Technologies. WDC bought them (Or more specifically, the HDD sector of Hitachi) a few years ago and rolled them into WDC as a sub-brand. They also bought all of HGST's manufacturing facilities too, so HGST drives aren't necessarily just WD with a Hitachi logo slapped onto it.

 

Haven't we already established that this is a bunch of BS?

Yes.

 

but even if they are like 10-15 dollars cheaper i would suppose that what every cost benefit you get is quickly lost and turn to the negatives when 40% of the drives fail

One thing of note, the 40% is from last year, not this year. They've actually seen a substantial drop in failures for Seagate compared to last year.

 

Plus, this graph does not go into the age of the HDD for failures. That's a huge missing data point, since all HDD's will fail more frequently with age. Ones that are 3 years old are much more likely to die compared to ones that are 6 months old. And ones that are 3 years old were likely budgeted for replacement anyway.

 

the grey bar goes to 40%

See above.

 

Yes, repeatedly.

These idiots pulled 2.5" external drives from their enclosures and ran them 24/7 in a server environment at one point, and published the "data" as if it wasn't worthless.

 

THEY ARE MUPPETS

 

Here's some real, verified data: (Failure rates within warranty periods through French online retailers in 2014)

 

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/255466-huge-list-of-failure-rates-for-all-pc-components/

 

Edit: I should point out that Seagate's 3TB drives have always been awful, I am not refuting that fact.

Agreed.

 

Yes, BlackBlaze's stats are horseshit and I have no idea why people still believe them.

 

IIRC from a few years ago they were putting consumer drives under 24/7 enterprise workloads and even taking drives out of enclosures (the ones where you buy a hard drive already in the external enclosure) and putting them into server racks and whatnot. Basically, everything was mixed and matched and there was zero consistency and it was not scientific or accurate whatsoever.

Agreed.

 

Because HGST is an enterprise class drive, designed for 24/7 use in a large array, there is a price premium for these drives and naturally their failure rate is lower

HGST are not "Enterprise" class drives. HGST is a HDD manufacturer/brand (Now a subsidiary of WDC, but they still have all the Hitachi fabs). They made a wide range of desktop HDD's, from consumer to enterprise. They still do.

https://www.hgst.com/hard-drives

 

They dropped out of the "consumer desktop HDD" category, but they still make NAS, Laptop, Enterprise, and Industry Specific (Think CCTV/AV/Security, as well as CNC or other Automation) drives.

 

NAS drives are still considered consumer drives though, so there's that in addition to the Laptop drives.

 

What people need to realize about these numbers is this:

 

The numbers themselves are not wrong, but they are invalid.

Why? Because for the simple reason that they are running Consumer, cheap-as-fuck desktop drives in a VERY HIGH LOAD Server/Enterprise environment.

 

No shit 40% of your HDD's failed when you're using consumer drives in a fucking mass storage pod.

I'm surprised that some of the drives held up NEARLY as well as they did.

 

The reason why these numbers are irrelevant, is because no one who buys consumer drives should be using them in this manner. It's irresponsibility for their IT/Purchasing departments. They're being cheap fuckers instead of investing in the proper HDD's that are properly designed, tested, and verified in those environments.


For Sale - iPhone SE 32GB - Unlocked - Rose GoldSold

Spoiler

 

 

* Intel i7-4770K * ASRock Z97 Anniversary * 16GB RAM * 750w Seasonic Modular PSU *

* Crucial M4 128GB SSD (Primary) * Hitachi 500GB HDD (Secondary) *

* Gigabyte HD 7950 WF3 * SATA Blu-Ray Writer * Logitech g710+ * Windows 10 Pro x64 *

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is not the method or the data.  The problem is people think this is some kind of study or test.  There is no testing, no studying here.  It is just essentially random numbers released by some company.  They simply state that this is what they use.  Then everyone and their mother thinks it is some kind of professional study done to determine the efficacy of HDD makers.  I will say that the way they put out the data is a bit misleading, but that is mostly for the very purpose that it causes controversy, thus spreading their name around, its basically just free publicity. 

 

The data is not flawed in and of itself.  It is 100% accurate.  The problem is people assume it to mean something it doesn't.  If I released some report about how my company bought mostly Ford trucks and said they spent more time in the shop than any of the other brands; but gave no other data, it would be correct data, but highly misleading.  BackBlaze is purposely doing this because the first time they released these numbers was simply as a cool data point for the IT community and PR reasons.  Then it exploded into a huge controversy and got them tons of free advertising, so they made some fancy graphs and they keep doing it because it keeps exploding.

 

Key things here; it is NOT a study, or a test, or anything like that.  It is simply presented that way to create hype and controversy to spread their name. 

 

Except that it is a study because the act of collecting data and analyzing the phenomenon of a subject then reporting the results is exactly that by definition. The results are flawed because the arrangements and use of the drives are not clearly reported.   As I said earlier the WD drives they had could have been in extremely light use while the Seagates could have been used for the highest workload.  We just don't know, and unless all that information is made available it contradicts all the other information that is out there.  Thus a flawed study.

 

If the data is accurate, then they are going to hope they can prove that should seagate ever decide to go them for defamation.   Because after 3 annual reports all looking the same and so many people claiming their results are "myth" and "flawed" they may have a case.


QuicK and DirtY. Read the CoC it's like a guide on how not to be moron.  Also I don't have an issue with the VS series.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Except that it is a study because the act of collecting data and analyzing the phenomenon of a subject then reporting the results is exactly that by definition. The results are flawed because the arrangements and use of the drives are not clearly reported.   As I said earlier the WD drives they had could have been in extremely light use while the Seagates could have been used for the highest workload.  We just don't know, and unless all that information is made available it contradicts all the other information that is out there.  Thus a flawed study.

 

If the data is accurate, then they are going to hope they can prove that should seagate ever decide to go them for defamation.   Because after 3 annual reports all looking the same and so many people claiming their results are "myth" and "flawed" they may have a case.

If think you're missing the point. They're just publishing which drives have failed in their data centre, if that many drives have failed then they're accurate. They aren't putting this out as the end all be test that you seem to think they're doing.


"In Russia live Russians. Any minority, from anywhere, if it wants to live in Russia, to work and eat in Russia, should speak Russian, and should respect the Russian laws. If they prefer Shari ‘a Law, then we advise them to go to those places where that's the state law. Russia does not need minorities. Minorities need Russia, and we will not grant them special privileges, or try to change our laws to fit their desires, no matter how loud they yell 'discrimination'." - Vladimir Putin. Other governments/leaders should take a leaf out of Vlad's book.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If think you're missing the point. They're just publishing which drives have failed in their data centre, if that many drives have failed then they're accurate. They aren't putting this out as the end all be test that you seem to think they're doing.

But they are putting it out there as a report on "what hard drive is best?",  a report on hard drive failures. 

 

https://www.backblaze.com/blog/best-hard-drive/

 

It's even in their URL which comes up as the lead title in a google search.


QuicK and DirtY. Read the CoC it's like a guide on how not to be moron.  Also I don't have an issue with the VS series.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But they are putting it out there as a report on "what hard drive is best?",  a report on hard drive failures. 

 

https://www.backblaze.com/blog/best-hard-drive/

 

It's even in their URL which comes up as the lead title in a google search.

Clickbait articles are a thing...

 

They're looking at which brand of hard drives are the best (or most reliable) in their data centre, anyone that even takes this seriously for consumer level use is an idiot. All they're showing is which drives have failed, they aren't claiming X is better than Y for consumer level builds.


"In Russia live Russians. Any minority, from anywhere, if it wants to live in Russia, to work and eat in Russia, should speak Russian, and should respect the Russian laws. If they prefer Shari ‘a Law, then we advise them to go to those places where that's the state law. Russia does not need minorities. Minorities need Russia, and we will not grant them special privileges, or try to change our laws to fit their desires, no matter how loud they yell 'discrimination'." - Vladimir Putin. Other governments/leaders should take a leaf out of Vlad's book.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Clickbait articles are a thing...

 

They're looking at which brand of hard drives are the best (or most reliable) in their data centre, anyone that even takes this seriously for consumer level use is an idiot. All they're showing is which drives have failed, they aren't claiming X is better than Y for consumer level builds.

 

Clickbait indeed,  doesn't change the fact they are representing this data to the public as a report on which drives are the best.


QuicK and DirtY. Read the CoC it's like a guide on how not to be moron.  Also I don't have an issue with the VS series.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Clickbait indeed,  doesn't change the fact they are representing this data to the public as a report on which drives are the best.

Ties into the clickbait thing really, present it in a way which generates controversy and word will get around. Free publicity.


"In Russia live Russians. Any minority, from anywhere, if it wants to live in Russia, to work and eat in Russia, should speak Russian, and should respect the Russian laws. If they prefer Shari ‘a Law, then we advise them to go to those places where that's the state law. Russia does not need minorities. Minorities need Russia, and we will not grant them special privileges, or try to change our laws to fit their desires, no matter how loud they yell 'discrimination'." - Vladimir Putin. Other governments/leaders should take a leaf out of Vlad's book.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ties into the clickbait thing really, present it in a way which generates controversy and word will get around. Free publicity.

 

So you admit they are presenting this as legitimate results as to which is the best hdd to buy?


QuicK and DirtY. Read the CoC it's like a guide on how not to be moron.  Also I don't have an issue with the VS series.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you admit they are presenting this as legitimate results as to which is the best hdd to buy?

It's presented that way in the graphs but it doesn't make the results inaccurate as all they're showing is how many drives have failed. Again, you'd have to be stupid to take these results seriously for consumer use.


"In Russia live Russians. Any minority, from anywhere, if it wants to live in Russia, to work and eat in Russia, should speak Russian, and should respect the Russian laws. If they prefer Shari ‘a Law, then we advise them to go to those places where that's the state law. Russia does not need minorities. Minorities need Russia, and we will not grant them special privileges, or try to change our laws to fit their desires, no matter how loud they yell 'discrimination'." - Vladimir Putin. Other governments/leaders should take a leaf out of Vlad's book.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If think you're missing the point. They're just publishing which drives have failed in their data centre, if that many drives have failed then they're accurate. They aren't putting this out as the end all be test that you seem to think they're doing.

The "data" might be accurate, but Context Matters.

 

How heavily were the drives used? How old were they used? What is the average "Hours on per month" for each brand? What if all their WD drives are less than 1 year old and were used as monthly backup drives, while all the Seagate Drivess are 4 years old and used as scratch drives with constant, daily, non-stop usage?

 

That might be an extreme example, but the point still stands. This data is useless because it doesn't give us a breakdown of age, usage, hours on, number of TB written per anum, etc.


For Sale - iPhone SE 32GB - Unlocked - Rose GoldSold

Spoiler

 

 

* Intel i7-4770K * ASRock Z97 Anniversary * 16GB RAM * 750w Seasonic Modular PSU *

* Crucial M4 128GB SSD (Primary) * Hitachi 500GB HDD (Secondary) *

* Gigabyte HD 7950 WF3 * SATA Blu-Ray Writer * Logitech g710+ * Windows 10 Pro x64 *

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's presented that way in the graphs but it doesn't make the results inaccurate as all they're showing is how many drives have failed. Again, you'd have to be stupid to take these results seriously for consumer use.

 

Given some of this forum (of tech enthusiasts) take it as gospel, it's not hard to imagine that your average consumer or amateur would easily take them results as overall bona fide god's own truth.    It appears many people here don't understand statistical analysis and the importance of eliminating/reporting bias conditions.


QuicK and DirtY. Read the CoC it's like a guide on how not to be moron.  Also I don't have an issue with the VS series.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The "data" might be accurate, but Context Matters.

 

How heavily were the drives used? How old were they used? What is the average "Hours on per month" for each brand? What if all their WD drives are less than 1 year old and were used as monthly backup drives, while all the Seagate Drivess are 4 years old and used as scratch drives with constant, daily, non-stop usage?

 

That might be an extreme example, but the point still stands. This data is useless because it doesn't give us a breakdown of age, usage, hours on, number of TB written per anum, etc.

Context is irrelevant if you ask me, backblaze isn't out to prove anything, people are just seeing something on the internet and believing it instantly.

If backblaze was trying to prove something then sure, context would matter, but in this senario it really doesn't matter. All they're showing is how many drives have failed in their data centre.

Given some of this forum (of tech enthusiasts) take it as gospel, it's not hard to imagine that your average consumer or amateur would easily take them results as overall bona fide god's own truth.    It appears many people here don't understand statistical analysis and the importance of eliminating/reporting bias conditions.

Let idiots be idiots, that's the way I go. It doesn't take long to figure out that a data centre is going to see far more drive usage than any consumer will. Not to mention that you shouldn't just go by one source when researching parts.       


"In Russia live Russians. Any minority, from anywhere, if it wants to live in Russia, to work and eat in Russia, should speak Russian, and should respect the Russian laws. If they prefer Shari ‘a Law, then we advise them to go to those places where that's the state law. Russia does not need minorities. Minorities need Russia, and we will not grant them special privileges, or try to change our laws to fit their desires, no matter how loud they yell 'discrimination'." - Vladimir Putin. Other governments/leaders should take a leaf out of Vlad's book.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Never had any issues with any of my seagate drives the 1TB and 500gb ones in my gaming pc are about 5 years old now still going fine only drive i've had fail is a WD laptop drive.


My PC specs are CPU: 6700k @4.7Ghz Ram: 16GB hyper x GPU: GTX 970 PSU: RM650 CPU cooler: custom liquid cooling  Case: Fractal Define R5 Motherboard: Msi z170 kraight gaming SSD: Intel 120GB and crucial m500

Link to post
Share on other sites

Context is irrelevant if you ask me, backblaze isn't out to prove anything, people are just seeing something on the internet and believing it instantly.

If backblaze was trying to prove something then sure, context would matter, but in this senario it really doesn't matter. All they're showing is how many drives have failed in their data centre.

Let idiots be idiots, that's the way I go. It doesn't take long to figure out that a data centre is going to see far more drive usage than any consumer will. Not to mention that you shouldn't just go by one source when researching parts.       

How can you possibly say context is irrelevant? That's the most ridiculous statement for technology I've ever hear.

 

Wow. Did you see the pieces of information I listed in my last post? Those are incredibly important.

 

If I buy a HDD, use it once every 6 months, where it otherwise sits in a dry, cool, box, and it lasts 17 years, and then I buy the competitors equivalent, and run it 24/7 as a Video Editing scratch drive that gets worked on around the clock by a rotating shift of editors, and it lasts 1.2 years, and then just graph "Model vs failure rate" after 2 years (yet not state how long the time has been), then those numbers are 100%, completely, unquestionably pointless.

 

That doesn't tell me which drive is more likely to fail. That doesn't state ANYTHING. That takes the data and misrepresents it to the nth degree.

 

Blackblaze might not be out to "prove" anything, but by not providing all the details, they are putting out data that could very well massively misrepresent the products.


For Sale - iPhone SE 32GB - Unlocked - Rose GoldSold

Spoiler

 

 

* Intel i7-4770K * ASRock Z97 Anniversary * 16GB RAM * 750w Seasonic Modular PSU *

* Crucial M4 128GB SSD (Primary) * Hitachi 500GB HDD (Secondary) *

* Gigabyte HD 7950 WF3 * SATA Blu-Ray Writer * Logitech g710+ * Windows 10 Pro x64 *

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

How can you possibly say context is irrelevant? That's the most ridiculous statement for technology I've ever hear.

 

Wow. Did you see the pieces of information I listed in my last post? Those are incredibly important.

 

If I buy a HDD, use it once every 6 months, where it otherwise sits in a dry, cool, box, and it lasts 17 years, and then I buy the competitors equivalent, and run it 24/7 as a Video Editing scratch drive that gets worked on around the clock by a rotating shift of editors, and it lasts 1.2 years, and then just graph "Model vs failure rate" after 2 years (yet not state how long the time has been), then those numbers are 100%, completely, unquestionably pointless.

 

That doesn't tell me which drive is more likely to fail. That doesn't state ANYTHING. That takes the data and misrepresents it to the nth degree.

 

Blackblaze might not be out to "prove" anything, but by not providing all the details, they are putting out data that could very well massively misrepresent the products.

If you want to give more ammo to fanboys then more power to you, I'm just saying that if they aren't out to prove anything what use is it mentioning what these drives are being used for?

 

Either way, you guys are taking this far too seriously and almost come across as damage control to me...


"In Russia live Russians. Any minority, from anywhere, if it wants to live in Russia, to work and eat in Russia, should speak Russian, and should respect the Russian laws. If they prefer Shari ‘a Law, then we advise them to go to those places where that's the state law. Russia does not need minorities. Minorities need Russia, and we will not grant them special privileges, or try to change our laws to fit their desires, no matter how loud they yell 'discrimination'." - Vladimir Putin. Other governments/leaders should take a leaf out of Vlad's book.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×