Looking for a mass storage drive

[King Oriax]

I'm looking for a hard drive that can store 2+ terabytes, is 7200rpm. and is rated to run for at least 6 hours a day. I've been looking for a while and was planning on spending no more than $150 but the longer I look the more options I have and the less sure I am. I've found a handful of Toshiba drives that are under $100 and have the same specs/performance as wd reds but I don't really know anything about them. I haven't really payed any attention to the hard drive space recently so I don't really know what brands are considered super reliable or are rated well anymore.

 

The drive would be mostly mass media storage and games that I either don't play often or things like league of legends that wouldn't really benefit from being on an SSD

[Rolfejc]

Just about any drive should work. There is generally a very little difference between HDD brands, so I would generally go with the cheapest.

 

https://pcpartpicker.com/part/seagate-internal-hard-drive-st2000dm001

[RedWulf]

WD blacks are the "premium" hdd and should run about <$125 for 2tb

[Moonzy]

Just now, Rolfejc said:

There is generally a very little difference between HDD brands

while i agree with this

seagate's barracuda or WD is the drives i normally go for lol

 

http://pcpartpicker.com/part/seagate-internal-hard-drive-st3000dm001

http://pcpartpicker.com/part/western-digital-internal-hard-drive-wd2003fzex

[Orangeator]

5 minutes ago, Rolfejc said:

Just about any drive should work. There is generally a very little difference between HDD brands, so I would generally go with the cheapest.

 

https://pcpartpicker.com/part/seagate-internal-hard-drive-st2000dm001

No, no, no, no, no, just no. Do not get a Seagate HDD, ever... They are literally guaranteed to die 1 month right outside the 2 year warranty. Don't believe me? Look at reviews. Go with WD, they are a much more reliable company.

[Rolfejc]

4 minutes ago, Moonzy said:

while i agree with this

seagate's barracuda or WD is the drives i normally go for lol

 

http://pcpartpicker.com/part/seagate-internal-hard-drive-st3000dm001

http://pcpartpicker.com/part/western-digital-internal-hard-drive-wd2003fzex

Agreed, although sometimes Hitachi and Toshiba drives pop up. 

[RedWulf]

2 minutes ago, Orangeator said:

No, no, no, no, no, just no. Do not get a Seagate HDD, ever... They are literally guaranteed to die 1 month right outside the 2 year warranty. Don't believe me? Look at reviews. Go with WD, they are a much more reliable company.

Without the extreme bias I agree, Hitachi and WD get high marks on both reliability, lifespan, and error amount/chance. Seagate typically does poorly, it's actually the only brand I've experienced personal failure with. If nothing else go with purple or blue in WD. The barracuda is abit better than typical seagate, but if you really want secure and reliable data and can afford it blacks are hailed as glorious. 

[Rolfejc]

5 minutes ago, Orangeator said:

No, no, no, no, no, just no. Do not get a Seagate HDD, ever... They are literally guaranteed to die 1 month right outside the 2 year warranty. Don't believe me? Look at reviews. Go with WD, they are a much more reliable company.

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

 

This Seagate not being reliable thing is a giant myth. Seagate is just as good as any HDD manufacturer, their drives actually can be faster than what WD offers half the time. 

[Orangeator]

2 minutes ago, Rolfejc said:

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

 

This Seagate not being reliable thing is a giant myth. Seagate is just as good as any HDD manufacturer, their drives actually can be faster than what WD offers half the time. 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148902

Have you read the reviews on any of their standard HDD's? Also I have had multiple Seagate HDD's fail on me within or just outside of 2 years with little use. 

[Rolfejc]

Just now, Orangeator said:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148902

Have you read the reviews on any of their standard HDD's? Also I have had multiple Seagate HDD's fail on me within or just outside of 2 years with little use. 

Drives can fail at any time. The BlackBlaze study isn't reliable info, along with user reviews. There is technically no real  proof for now that Seagate drives are not as reliable as other manufacturers. 

[RedWulf]

http://petapixel.com/2016/02/02/photographers-beware-seagate-slapped-with-a-class-action-suit-over-bad-hard-drives/

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2089464/three-year-27-000-drive-study-reveals-the-most-reliable-hard-drive-makers.html

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/175089-who-makes-the-most-reliable-hard-drives

1 minute ago, Rolfejc said:

Drives can fail at any time. The BlackBlaze study isn't reliable info, along with user reviews. There is technically no real  proof for now that Seagate drives are not as reliable as other manufacturers. 

I'm sorry, so despite studies and user reviews, would you like the CEOs to confess or does your personal drive outrank others? 

[Kobathor]

2 minutes ago, RedWulf said:

http://petapixel.com/2016/02/02/photographers-beware-seagate-slapped-with-a-class-action-suit-over-bad-hard-drives/

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2089464/three-year-27-000-drive-study-reveals-the-most-reliable-hard-drive-makers.html

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/175089-who-makes-the-most-reliable-hard-drives

I'm sorry, so despite studies and user reviews, would you like the CEOs to confess or does your personal drive outrank others? 

lol 2 of the three articles are just the Backblaze findings written into a topic

kek

[Rolfejc]

2 minutes ago, RedWulf said:

http://petapixel.com/2016/02/02/photographers-beware-seagate-slapped-with-a-class-action-suit-over-bad-hard-drives/

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2089464/three-year-27-000-drive-study-reveals-the-most-reliable-hard-drive-makers.html

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/175089-who-makes-the-most-reliable-hard-drives

I'm sorry, so despite studies and user reviews, would you like the CEOs to confess or does your personal drive outrank others? 

All of those links use the BackBlaze study, which has proven to NOT be a reliable source of information as it tests drives in ways they aren't supposed to be used. For crying out loud they modified external Seagate drives into desktop drives. It IS NOT a reliable source of information. 

[RedWulf]

Just now, Kobathor said:

lol 2 of the three articles are just the Backblaze findings written into a topic

kek

All three were, two covered the results and one covered the lawsuit that followed, regardless I haven't seen a study to prove the opposite. The counter claim above just talks about the inaccuracies of the study by backblaze. It is flawed, but again, no real study to directly prove the opposite and there was no real bias that would victimize seagate thusly its failure rate was still higher even if the conditions were harsh on the drives.

Then we get into user reviews; if you like the brands, congrats, but don't pass it off as equally reliable if there's more evidence for less reliability. 

You're suggesting that your own experiences/statements carry more authority than other users and study groups.  

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Most-Reliable-Hardware-of-2015-749/ 

[Kobathor]

5 minutes ago, RedWulf said:

All three were, two covered the results and one covered the lawsuit that followed, regardless I haven't seen a study to prove the opposite. The counter claim above just talks about the inaccuracies of the study by backblaze. It is flawed, but again, no real study to directly prove the opposite and there was no real bias that would victimize seagate thusly its failure rate was still higher even if the conditions were harsh on the drives.

Then we get into user reviews; if you like the brands, congrats, but don't pass it off as equally reliable if there's more evidence for less reliability. 

You're suggesting that your own experiences/statements carry more authority than other users and study groups.  

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Most-Reliable-Hardware-of-2015-749/ 

What experiences? A 1TB Seagate Barracuda has been in my parent's PC for about 5 years now with no failure. That's the only experience I have with them. I have a 620GB WD Blue that is failing after about 2 years of use now, I'm getting it replaced this week. Other than that every hard drive I've used has been okay, none failing or anything. The 620GB Blue is excusable because it's old and had been used for about a year, went into storage (dry and room temperature, mind you) then into my PC.

 

Also, WTF was the article you listed?

[King Oriax]

36 minutes ago, RedWulf said:

WD blacks are the "premium" hdd and should run about <$125 for 2tb

How are they compared to the pro reds? They have the same performance but reds tend to run quieter/cooler usually right?

[RedWulf]

8 minutes ago, King Oriax said:

How are they compared to the pro reds? They have the same performance but reds tend to run quieter/cooler usually right?

The blacks get better performance reviews and Reds are aimed for RAID/NASs. Since we don't know all of your priorities, perhaps this will clarify some. 

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Understanding-the-WD-Rainbow-674/ 

13 minutes ago, Kobathor said:

What experiences? A 1TB Seagate Barracuda has been in my parent's PC for about 5 years now with no failure. That's the only experience I have with them. I have a 620GB WD Blue that is failing after about 2 years of use now, I'm getting it replaced this week. Other than that every hard drive I've used has been okay, none failing or anything. The 620GB Blue is excusable because it's old and had been used for about a year, went into storage (dry and room temperature, mind you) then into my PC.

 

Also, WTF was the article you listed?

Um, well you just listed experience that would cause justifiable bias and other than assuming a flawed study should exclusively be negated, seems to be the only real grounds for the "seagate is good" argument

 

The article was just another. presumable non backblaze, was just a bump for WD.

[King Oriax]

On 3/21/2016 at 2:59 PM, RedWulf said:

The blacks get better performance reviews and Reds are aimed for RAID/NASs. Since we don't know all of your priorities, perhaps this will clarify some. 

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Understanding-the-WD-Rainbow-674/ 

Mostly a mass storage for movies tv shows and the like. I do some light video editing stuff but honestly not all that much anymore. I guess I'll go with the black it uses slightly less power and gives off slightly less noise than the pro red it seems, so thanks!

[Captain_WD]

15 hours ago, King Oriax said:

~snip~

Hey there King Oriax,

 

My two cents on this:
- 7,200 rpm solely means that the drive would produce more heat and vibrations (hence more noise) and it would consume more energy.
- 6 hours a day can be 6 hours of stand-by or 6 hours of intensive reading or writing.
- Gaming doesn't rely on the storage's performance for anything but the loading times so you wouldn't see much of a difference for most games regardless if you are using a high-performance drive or a regular everyday drive.

 

Since the drive will mostly be used for media and gaming I would recommend going for something like a WD Blue as it is designed just for this purpose. 6 hours a day is quite a regular time for usage WD Blue can handle the required tasks pretty well.

 

WD Black is indeed a great performance drive with long warranty and a design for extensive and heavy usage but you are not likely to see any significant performance difference for the things you will be doing so I'd say it would be an overkill.

 

If you specify a bit what exactly you'd be doing with the drive (like specific games or applications or types of media) we might be able to offer a better solution.

 

Captain_WD.