Are SSD/SSHD's worth it for home servers in RAID 1?

[TheWestWing]

Is it worth getting a SSHD or SSD over a normal HDD for a home server running in RAID 1? Also is there a clear difference between Seagate Barracuda and WD Blue?

[ProjectBox153]

What is it going to be used for? For general storage, SSHD's aren't worth it. 

[79wjd]

1 minute ago, TheWestWing said:

Is it worth getting a SSHD or SSD over a normal HDD for a home server running in RAID 1?

No.

1 minute ago, TheWestWing said:

Also is there a clear difference between Seagate Barracuda and WD Blue?

Not really. Barracudas are faster than the 5400rpm version of the blue, but in a server it more than likely won't matter. 

[NTDaws]

1 minute ago, Jamiec1130 said:

What is it going to be used for? For general storage, SSHD's aren't worth it. 

You'd be surprised.

[TheWestWing]

2 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

No.

Not really. Barracudas are faster than the 5400rpm version of the blue, but in a server it more than likely won't matter. 

Both are 7200 rpm. Also why does SSD over HDD not matter in your opinion?

[ProjectBox153]

Just now, TheWestWing said:

Both are 7200 rpm. Also why does SSD over HDD not matter in your opinion?

We don't know what it will be used for. 

[79wjd]

Just now, TheWestWing said:

Both are 7200 rpm. Also why does SSD over HDD not matter in your opinion?

Because you're more than likely going to be limited by your network anyway and under most home server loads you woudn't even benefit from higher transfer speeds even if the network wasn't the bottleneck.

[TheWestWing]

Just now, Jamiec1130 said:

We don't know what it will be used for. 

Some web hosting and file storage

[ProjectBox153]

Just now, TheWestWing said:

Some web hosting and file storage

Then you don't need SSDs, especially for home usage. 

[ProjectBox153]

Just now, Jamiec1130 said:

Then you don't need SSDs, especially for home usage. You'll be limited by your network, anyway. 

 

[TheWestWing]

1 minute ago, djdwosk97 said:

Because you're more than likely going to be limited by your network anyway and under most home server loads you woudn't even benefit from higher transfer speeds even if the network wasn't the bottleneck.

So, Seagate Barracuda 1 TB Internal HDD - 3.5" -  SATA 6Gb/s - 7,200 rpm would be a good choice?

[79wjd]

1 minute ago, TheWestWing said:

So, Seagate Barracuda 1 TB Internal HDD - 3.5" -  SATA 6Gb/s - 7,200 rpm would be a good choice?

I'd switch to a NAS drive if you see one at a similar price point (even if it's only 5400/5900 rpm), but if not, then that's fine. 

[ProjectBox153]

Just now, TheWestWing said:

So, Seagate Barracuda 1 TB Internal HDD - 3.5" -  SATA 6Gb/s - 7,200 rpm would be a good choice?

That would be fine if it enough storage for you. 

[TheWestWing]

Just now, djdwosk97 said:

yeah

Alright thanks for the help

[TheWestWing]

3 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

yeah

 

I'd switch to a NAS drive if you see one at a similar pricepoint, but if not, then that's fine. 

Alright one more possibly stupid question. If it says 1 internal bay and 1 external bay, I can still run RAID1 right?

[TheWestWing]

4 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

I'd switch to a NAS drive if you see one at a similar price point (even if it's only 5400/5900 rpm), but if not, then that's fine. 

What's the difference between NAS and normal drives?

[79wjd]

1 minute ago, TheWestWing said:

Alright one more possibly stupid question. If it says 1 internal bay and 1 external bay, I can still run RAID1 right?

The difference between an internal and an external drive is that an external drive bay is accessible from the outside. What case do you have? 

Just now, TheWestWing said:

What's the difference between NAS and normal drives?

NAS drives are designed to run 24/7 and sometimes have features that are useful in RAID arrays. For just two drives in a RAID 1 it should't really matter, but it's still a good choice if they're the same price. 

[TheWestWing]

Just now, djdwosk97 said:

What case do you have?

hp 8300 elite sff

Drive bays

External: (1) 13.33 cm (5.25 in), (1) 8.89 cm (3.5 in) Internal: (1) 8.89 cm (3.5 in)

[ProjectBox153]

25 minutes ago, TheWestWing said:

hp 8300 elite sff

Drive bays

External: (1) 13.33 cm (5.25 in), (1) 8.89 cm (3.5 in) Internal: (1) 8.89 cm (3.5 in)

Is this going to be your home server?

[seagate_surfer]

For NAS/server use, you're actually going to be better off with a NAS rated drive, these usually are referred to as red-labeled drives. Different drives are built for different use cases. A NAS-rated drive is rated for 24x7 use, being continuously ready to go at a moment's notice with firmware optimizations for multiple users/device access, and vibration control. 
 

When you bunch up hard drives together in enclosures typical for NAS units or servers, the confinement with all of that spinning, operation, and moving parts creates a lot of vibration, and the hard drives can really beat up on each-other. NAS drives are optimized with firmware that manages and mitigates these issues, and some also have RV (Rotational Vibration) sensors which serve this purpose even further. You're not going to see that kind of firmware and design in a standard desktop rated drive.

For comparison, a standard BarraCuda drive is rated for 8 hours a day x 5 day a week usage, and to handle up to 55TB of data per year, whereas a standard IronWolf NAS drive is rated for the mentioned 24x7 use and to handle up to 180TB per year, with the IronWolf Pro rated for 300TB per year.
 

Another consideration is warranty. One of the things that people like about drives rated for NAS use is they typically come with longer warranties as well. For example, a standard BarraCuda comes with a 2 year warranty and a standard IronWolf comes with a 3 year warranty, with the Pro edition having a 5 year warranty.
 

Regardless of which drive you determine is right for you in the end, thank you for considering Seagate!

[TheWestWing]

1 hour ago, Jamiec1130 said:

Is this going to be your home server?

yes