Jump to content

Seagate Hard Drives Fail Easily?

CowsGoRoar
 Share
Posted

These debates are always fun.

 

OP: Hard drive manufacturer X sucks because drives fail prematurely.

 

Responder 1: Nuh uh....I have one drive that lasted FOREVER.  There's no possible way any X hard drive could fail prematurely because mine never did.

 

Responder 2: Yeah huh....I got a brand X drive and it gave me the HIV.

 

 

 

lol...hard drives fail.  Some fail early.  Some last forever.  The brand really doesn't matter as much as most people seem to think it does.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

It said in the article that they were Barracuda 7200 rpm.

 

Where did you find that info? Obviously external hard drives would die sooner.

Linus talked about this in length

 

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/6028/dispelling-backblaze-s-hdd-reliability-myth-the-real-story-covered/index2.html

If your grave doesn't say "rest in peace" on it You are automatically drafted into the skeleton war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
  • Author

That article was pure junk. The Backblaze charts were all biased.

 

It's all just luck. Gambling on buying the right hard drive.  ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

That article was pure junk. The Backblaze charts were all biased.

 

It's all just luck. Gambling on buying the right hard drive.  ;)

I took the wrong gamble by getting WD.

"If it has tits or tires, at some point you will have problems with it." -@vinyldash303

this is probably the only place i'll hang out anymore: http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/274320-the-long-awaited-car-thread/

 

Current Rig: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600, Abit IN9-32MAX nForce 680i board, Galaxy GT610 1GB DDR3 gpu, Cooler Master Mystique 632S Full ATX case, 1 2TB Seagate Barracuda SATA and 1x200gb Maxtor SATA drives, 1 LG SATA DVD drive, Windows 10. All currently runs like shit :D 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
  • Author

I took the wrong gamble by getting WD.

Not exactly. Seagate hard drives in the graph was biased. They were the external drives taken from the outer casing into a poorly made case that was full of vibration that caused them to die.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

It's a lie. I've had Seagate hard drives last way over 10 years.

 

I wish my hard drives lasted long enough to be nearly the same age as me..

Like E-Sports? Check out the E-Sports forum for competitive click click pew pew

Like Anime? Check out Heaven Society the forums local Anime club

I was only living because it was too much trouble to die.

R9 7950x | RTX4090

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

My 500GB Seagata Barracuda Sata II failed after 6 years but 3 of those years i had SSD for bootdrive.It still works even now but i have SMART Warnings and sometimes errors when i try to write,that was when i had it almost full now its pretty empty and probably the bad sectors are further now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Sigh. This crap again. People, think logically. Between Seagate and WD they make 90% of all the hdd's sold each year. Neither could sustain business if their drives were crap and it also wouldn't be a surprise to anyone. *Everyone* would know about it!

 

If it's not an engineering issue which makes a particular model vulnerable i.e. IBM's "Deathstars", then any consistent failures are environmental. Bad enclosures, bad power, bad weather, idiocy abounding at a particular site. It can happen to anyone's drives, servers, chips, cards or fans.

Sir William of Orange: Corsair 230T - Rebel Orange, 4690K, GA-97X SOC, 16gb Dom Plats 1866C9,  2 MX100 256gb, Seagate 2tb Desktop, EVGA Supernova 750-G2, Be Quiet! Dark Rock 3, DK 9008 keyboard, Pioneer BR drive. Yeah, on board graphics - deal with it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

That article was pure junk. The Backblaze charts were all biased.

 

It's all just luck. Gambling on buying the right hard drive.  ;)

 

Blackblaze charts aren't biased, it just goes to prove their hardware is crappy, bad cooling and bad hardware (cheap SATA back planes) all contributed to the increased failure rates. Had they used more WD drives they would of come up with the same numbers for them.

 

As always you need to read the fine print and see for your self the test bed used, as why every site listing benchmarks lists everything out so you know how to reproduce the data exactly. Blackblaze never tested another manufacture's hardware with the same test did they, to have the blind study, nope.

I roll with sigs off so I have no idea what you're advertising.

 

This is NOT the signature you are looking for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Well, I have replaced quite a few Seagate hard drives in one HP ProLiant ML350 server. Never had a problem if HP was sending us WDC hard drives in replacement of the Seagate hard drives. Knock on wood though, my personal Seagate hard drives are still working fine after who knows how many years. Luckily none of them are from the 7200.11 fiasco.

Phanteks Enthoo Pro Black | Corsair TX750v2 | ASRock Z97 Extreme4 | Core i5 4670K @ 4.4 GHz @ 1.27V | Corsair H105 | 16GB Patriot Viper 3 PC3-12800 | EVGA GeForce GTX 770 | Axiom Signature III 240GB SSD | WDC 1TB Blue | Hitachi 750GB

I use a 'moron filter' on tech forums. If I don't respond to your post, considered yourself filtered out.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
  • Author

Blackblaze charts aren't biased, it just goes to prove their hardware is crappy, bad cooling and bad hardware (cheap SATA back planes) all contributed to the increased failure rates. Had they used more WD drives they would of come up with the same numbers for them.

 

As always you need to read the fine print and see for your self the test bed used, as why every site listing benchmarks lists everything out so you know how to reproduce the data exactly. Blackblaze never tested another manufacture's hardware with the same test did they, to have the blind study, nope.

The Seagate hard drives were actually external ones taken from their casing and put into their crappy bench.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

The Seagate hard drives were actually external ones taken from their casing and put into their crappy bench.

 

Exactly, who knows how careful they were in removing them. If you ever tried disassembling some of them you know at times you need a freaking crow bar to get them out, so not the safest conditions for a drive to be in.

I roll with sigs off so I have no idea what you're advertising.

 

This is NOT the signature you are looking for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

If you maintain your hard drives properly, they should still last a very long time. But in terms of failure rates between WD and Seagate, in my experience they are about the same. Of course it could differ for others because of their environment and how well they look after their systems. But Seagate would theoretically have a slightly higher failure rate than WD just because they ship a bit more than them. But Seagate drives are still very good today  :)

[ Rig: CPU: 4930K, GPU: EVGA 780TI SC x2, RAM: 32GB Corsair Vengeance 1600MHz, Mobo: ASUS P9 X79 LE, Storage: 120GB Samsung EVO + 2TB Seagate Barracuda, PSU: Corsair RM1000 ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Tha graphs are outdated. I never used Seagate, and I was about to buy SSHD and I was asking the same question. Nobody knew the answer though. I think they are good. If they fail they are not that expensive afterall. Except if you dont go for the 4TB ones. I am curently using Hitachi - for 6/7 years now. Can't be more satisfied. Never had any problem.

CPU: Ryzen 5 2600, MOBO: MSI Tomahawk B450, RAM: Corsair Vengeance RGB 3000 (2x8 GB), GPU: MSI RTX 2080 Gaming-X Trio, CPU Cooler: Noctua NH-U12S, PSU: Corsair RM 650, HDD: WD Blue 1TB, SSD: Samsung 860 ECO 500GB, CASE: Fractal Design Meshify C

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Tha graphs are outdated. I never used Seagate, and I was about to buy SSHD and I was asking the same question. Nobody knew the answer though. I think they are good. If they fail they are not that expensive afterall. Except if you dont go for the 4TB ones. I am curently using Hitachi - for 6/7 years now. Can't be more satisfied. Never had any problem.

 

SSHD's are a whole different animal, no comparison. The questions with SSHD's are can you use the HDD part if the SSD part fails and vice versa? If not then it makes it a crap shot in the long run. HDD's already include a cache so not really sure why an SSHD would benefit you (in the long run) over a SSD and HDD combo with the SSD used as a cache, if either failed you'd still have the other.

I roll with sigs off so I have no idea what you're advertising.

 

This is NOT the signature you are looking for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

SSHD's are a whole different animal, no comparison. The questions with SSHD's are can you use the HDD part if the SSD part fails and vice versa? If not then it makes it a crap shot in the long run. HDD's already include a cache so not really sure why an SSHD would benefit you (in the long run) over a SSD and HDD combo with the SSD used as a cache, if either failed you'd still have the other.

The SSHD pretty much has a larger cache than a regular HDD.

"If it has tits or tires, at some point you will have problems with it." -@vinyldash303

this is probably the only place i'll hang out anymore: http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/274320-the-long-awaited-car-thread/

 

Current Rig: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600, Abit IN9-32MAX nForce 680i board, Galaxy GT610 1GB DDR3 gpu, Cooler Master Mystique 632S Full ATX case, 1 2TB Seagate Barracuda SATA and 1x200gb Maxtor SATA drives, 1 LG SATA DVD drive, Windows 10. All currently runs like shit :D 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
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
 Share
Go to topic listing Storage Devices

×