WD Red vs WD Green vs Seagate 3TB Hard Drive Speeds - Page 19 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the Watchuseek.com newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!


Forum Jump: 
 6Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #541 of 884 Old 07-17-2013, 06:55 AM
Advanced Member
 
Anthony_Gomez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: On the coast
Posts: 804
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Liked: 178
Anthony_Gomez is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #542 of 884 Old 07-17-2013, 07:07 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 28,480
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 442 Post(s)
Liked: 1740
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony_Gomez View Post

4TB Seagate at tigerdirect for 149.99 after rebate.
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/searchtools/item-Details.asp?EdpNo=7739052&sku=TSD-4000AS2

Costco 3TB for $99 better IMO

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
post #543 of 884 Old 07-17-2013, 07:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bryansj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 6,728
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 235 Post(s)
Liked: 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Costco 3TB for $99 better IMO

The 4TB needs to be $133.33.

bryansj is offline  
post #544 of 884 Old 07-17-2013, 07:44 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 28,480
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 442 Post(s)
Liked: 1740
Quote:
Originally Posted by bryansj View Post

The 4TB needs to be $133.33.

And 7200rpm smile.gif

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
post #545 of 884 Old 07-17-2013, 08:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bryansj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 6,728
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 235 Post(s)
Liked: 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

And 7200rpm smile.gif

Correct. Plus not fail.

bryansj is offline  
post #546 of 884 Old 07-17-2013, 08:29 AM
Advanced Member
 
Anthony_Gomez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: On the coast
Posts: 804
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Liked: 178
as posted before, RPM isn't everything smile.gif (though nothing wrong with faster if you are ok with the increased noise/vibration/heat)
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/desktop-hdd.15-st4000dm000-4tb,3494.html
Anthony_Gomez is offline  
post #547 of 884 Old 07-17-2013, 09:36 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 28,480
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 442 Post(s)
Liked: 1740
The 4tb Seagate is the only reduced spindle speed drive I'd consider for myself for personal use.

Minus this one exception most reduced spindle speed drives are generally as poor a performer as they are a poor value.

$33 per TB of 7200.14 awesomeness is tough to beat.

I've said ten times earlier in this thread that heat/noise/energy/vibration are a myth based on yesterday's tech and clever marketing.

Reality is a small difference real world. For a server build with multiple drives its not like 7200.14 are any hotter, louder or use more energy. There is basically no difference.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
post #548 of 884 Old 07-17-2013, 09:42 AM
Advanced Member
 
Anthony_Gomez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: On the coast
Posts: 804
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Liked: 178
When you stack a lot of drives, heat can matter..more heat = more air flow needed = more fan noise. But, with a flexraid type system, you aren't accessing all drives simultaniously, so this is kinda moot (except for those running a hardware striped raid).
I actually can hear my HDD in my HTPC which using the WD Black drives.
Anthony_Gomez is offline  
post #549 of 884 Old 07-17-2013, 11:20 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 28,480
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 442 Post(s)
Liked: 1740
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony_Gomez View Post

When you stack a lot of drives, heat can matter..more heat = more air flow needed = more fan noise. But, with a flexraid type system, you aren't accessing all drives simultaniously, so this is kinda moot (except for those running a hardware striped raid).
I actually can hear my HDD in my HTPC which using the WD Black drives.


But a WD black is terrible wink.gif A WD black is a good deal worse at those specific characteristics than a Seagate 7200.14 3TB (or 1TB/2TB)

Essentially a WD RED and a WD GREEN @ 5400rpm are most like a Seagate 7200.14 at those attributes, and all are better than a WD Black. No one uses a Black in an HTPC ( except you smile.gif )

You can't use a generally bad drive that represents everything people hate about old school 7200rpm drives and then point to a modern 7200rpm Seagate and say it is the same simply because its also same spindle speed. The Seagate is quite a bit better on things like energy profile and noise compared to older hard drives. It's also faster too tongue.gif

The same difference between a WD black versus a WD red and green can be seen between a WD black and a Seagate 7200. There is not much difference between a Seagate 7200 and WD red or green either.

Lots of data showing this all over, including earlier pages this thread. I hate to sound like I am selling the 3TB 7200.14 so much but it just bugs the crap out out of me when I read generalizations that are simply wrong.

For me- The performance drop to 5400rpm is not worth it over a modern 7200rpm (As in the WD RED/GREEN versus Seagate 7200.14 ) because there is almost no difference real world at any of the factors the slower spindle speed is supposed to improve. In contrast there is a really big difference in the areas the slower spindle speed is not designed or marketed to improve- Like performance, Read Speed, Write Speed, Random 4k, Seek Time, etc... I think you give up a great deal with some 5400rpm drives to gain very little. But the myth exists that there is a problem with heat, noise, energy, and vibration - which simply is wrong; No issue exists. I have 14 of them in my server and it's quiet, cool, and energy efficient. Any appropriate server case has enough air flow and should be designed and capable of cooling multiple hard drives regardless of spindle speed. Only in the smallest HTPC cases are you going to need to worry about the issues your talking about- and it's probably smarter to just go SSD only and network your storage elsewhere if that's your thing. SSD only builds use even less energy, are even smaller, and more quiet eek.gif

I tend to consider big storage drives, and multitudes of them as server parts- not HTPC parts. I think the trend is moving that direction and a dedicated storage media server has some advantages over the old school approach of putting your storage drive inside your HTPC. First, you can locate it in a good location where noise is less an issue, and size is less an issue. This means you can use an appropriate case that's designed to do very well in those two areas, as opposed to an HTPC case that is often designed for aesthetics and small size at the expense of proper cooling, anti-vibrations, and is noisier because it's smaller. You get a silent HTPC, that is smaller- and you get to have more storage with a server. Have your cake and eat it too.

My server is quiet. It runs really cool. It's not small, and I did do a fan blade upgrade to 120mm with SilentX fans to make it very quiet- but the result is for me none of the issue you speak about are of any concern at all. And- even if they were there is little to no difference between a 7200rpm and a 5400rpm or 5900rpm. Your 4TB Seagate is a great drive- but it's not any significantly more amount cooler, quieter, or less vibration. It's slightly better than average, but so is the 3TB Seagate too. Both are great drives. It's like comparing two great cars in the same class. They are both good.

But the 5900RPM modern Seagate 4TB is the cream of the crop in performance- it's way better than most 5400rpm/5900rpm drives- and it's approaching the territory where the performance and speed isn't a factor. In the real world a 4TB WD should go about as fast as your Gigabit LAN will go. So - beyond this is not that important. A 5400RPM GREEN or WD RED drive once full should slow down more than your LAN speed limit and thus be a bottle neck on performance. The difference in read or write speeds between a 3TB WD GREEN or RED and a 3TB Seagate is pretty noticeable- There is a real world benefit that is obvious if you try to copy or paste a few bluray's. I have to remind myself to exclude the 4TB Seagate when I make generalizations about lower spindle speed drives (like WD, Hitachi, Samsung, Toshiba and other Seagate "green" models ). It seems like the combo of Seagates better tracking system on 1Tb platters combined with the extra 700rpm (WD/others @ 5400rpm versus Seagate @5900rpm) seems to make the drop in performance much less extreme and is a better balance IMO. It still lacks the performance of the 3TB though, and sometimes lacks the cost per TB value. It does win the capacity battle by virtue of simply being bigger- and this is probably the major reason you'd want one over the 3TB. Not because it's better, but because it's bigger.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
post #550 of 884 Old 07-17-2013, 11:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
captain_video's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ellicott City, MD
Posts: 3,894
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 262 Post(s)
Liked: 261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Costco 3TB for $99 better IMO
Agreed. Just picked up two of them at lunchtime from my local Costco. Removing the case is relatively simple.
captain_video is offline  
post #551 of 884 Old 07-17-2013, 12:04 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 28,480
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 442 Post(s)
Liked: 1740
Quote:
Originally Posted by captain_video View Post

Agreed. Just picked up two of them at lunchtime from my local Costco. Removing the case is relatively simple.


You can actually do it in a way it will go back together too biggrin.gif

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
post #552 of 884 Old 07-17-2013, 03:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
captain_video's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ellicott City, MD
Posts: 3,894
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 262 Post(s)
Liked: 261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

You can actually do it in a way it will go back together too biggrin.gif
I wouldn't do it any other way. biggrin.gif

What's really nice about the Seagate enclosures is that the USB to SATA interface is in an enclosed module that simply snaps apart from the drive case. You should be able to attach any SATA drive to it in a pinch to use as an external drive. It's great if you just need to access a drive without having to install it internally. I wouldn't use it as a permanent setup unless I installed the drive in the enclosure and reassembled it, but it should work fine for temporary use.
captain_video is offline  
post #553 of 884 Old 07-18-2013, 06:29 AM
 
cybrsage's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 8,074
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by captain_video View Post

I wouldn't do it any other way. biggrin.gif

What's really nice about the Seagate enclosures is that the USB to SATA interface is in an enclosed module that simply snaps apart from the drive case. You should be able to attach any SATA drive to it in a pinch to use as an external drive. It's great if you just need to access a drive without having to install it internally. I wouldn't use it as a permanent setup unless I installed the drive in the enclosure and reassembled it, but it should work fine for temporary use.

I did that with two 4TB ones I purchased - I put two 1.5TB drives in them and am using one as my backup drive (holds the backups of all my PCs) and the other as a portable drive. In case of fire in my house, I just grab my HTPC and the attached backup drive and I can restore all the others. smile.gif
cybrsage is offline  
post #554 of 884 Old 07-19-2013, 01:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
amarshonarbangla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,253
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 40
I wonder if HAMR drives will be out before the end of this decade.
amarshonarbangla is offline  
post #555 of 884 Old 07-19-2013, 09:25 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 28,480
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 442 Post(s)
Liked: 1740
Quote:
Originally Posted by amarshonarbangla View Post

I wonder if HAMR drives will be out before the end of this decade.

Heat-assisted magnetic recording (HAMR) is a technology that magnetically records data on high-stability media using laser thermal assistance to first heat the material. HAMR takes advantage of high-stability magnetic compounds such as iron platinum alloy. These materials can store single bits in a much smaller area without being limited by the same superparamagnetic effect that limits the current technology used in hard disk storage. The only catch being that they must be heated to apply the changes in magnetic orientation. HAMR could increase the limit of magnetic recording by more than a factor of 100. This could result in storage capacities as great as 50 terabits per square inch. eek.gif

http://nanomag.ucsd.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Kryder-review1.pdf

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
post #556 of 884 Old 07-19-2013, 05:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
amarshonarbangla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,253
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Heat-assisted magnetic recording (HAMR) is a technology that magnetically records data on high-stability media using laser thermal assistance to first heat the material. HAMR takes advantage of high-stability magnetic compounds such as iron platinum alloy. These materials can store single bits in a much smaller area without being limited by the same superparamagnetic effect that limits the current technology used in hard disk storage. The only catch being that they must be heated to apply the changes in magnetic orientation. HAMR could increase the limit of magnetic recording by more than a factor of 100. This could result in storage capacities as great as 50 terabits per square inch. eek.gif

http://nanomag.ucsd.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Kryder-review1.pdf

Yes 36TB drives FTW.
amarshonarbangla is offline  
post #557 of 884 Old 07-20-2013, 08:55 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 28,480
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 442 Post(s)
Liked: 1740
Ill be happy with 6TB for now.

I guess there is a performance penalty with them though frown.gif

The helium six platter tech from Hitachi doesn't have that. That's why WD wanted Hitachi so bad.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
post #558 of 884 Old 07-26-2013, 12:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
amarshonarbangla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,253
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 40
amarshonarbangla is offline  
post #559 of 884 Old 07-26-2013, 01:20 AM
Senior Member
 
DavidT99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 241
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 13
I'm sticking with 2tb drives for now, the cost in time restoring a drive over 2tb is too much for me, the cost in time of replacing lost data over 2tb is a nightmare scenario so I am keeping individual drive sizes low for now. I would rather have 5x 2tb than 1x 10tb.

I know the monetary cost is higher but money can be replaced time spent is gone forever.

David
DavidT99 is offline  
post #560 of 884 Old 07-26-2013, 02:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
amarshonarbangla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,253
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 40
That's what RAID is for smile.gif
amarshonarbangla is offline  
post #561 of 884 Old 07-26-2013, 02:42 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Nevcairiel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,062
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 132

Did you read the whole article, specifically the part about it being unsure if it will be used for consumer drives?
Enterprise drives are too expensive for my taste. tongue.gif
Nevcairiel is offline  
post #562 of 884 Old 07-26-2013, 03:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
amarshonarbangla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,253
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevcairiel View Post

Did you read the whole article, specifically the part about it being unsure if it will be used for consumer drives?
Enterprise drives are too expensive for my taste. tongue.gif

Did you read my whole post, specifically the part when I said "might"?
amarshonarbangla is offline  
post #563 of 884 Old 07-27-2013, 07:54 AM
Member
 
Jsolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 45
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Interesting thread. Read the first few pages, but seems to be lots and lots of bickering going back and forth (internet penis contest??)

My question is, is there is a cliff notes version of this thread? I'd love to read the whole thing, but have time constraints.

Perhaps the OP can be updated with a general summary..
Jsolo is offline  
post #564 of 884 Old 07-27-2013, 08:22 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 28,480
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 442 Post(s)
Liked: 1740
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jsolo View Post

Interesting thread. Read the first few pages, but seems to be lots and lots of bickering going back and forth (internet penis contest??)

My question is, is there is a cliff notes version of this thread? I'd love to read the whole thing, but have time constraints.

Perhaps the OP can be updated with a general summary..

Thread Cliff Notes: Originally WD RED GREEN was compared to two year old generation 3TB Seagate with 5 platters of 600GB and it was claimed there was not much difference among hard drives. Then it was determined that modern Seagate 7200.14's today use modern 1TB platters (Only 3 platters) and are considerably faster and higher performance than WD RED/GREEN, while simultanously and usually selling for less per TB, and being nearly the same in energy efficiency. We debated the two generation old tech of 600GB platters versus newer 800GB platters and 1TB platters. Then we bickered for a while, but at the end of the day it still stands that modern drives with higher platter density and fewer platters will be faster and use less energy. Then we talked about 5900rpm drives 4TB from Seagate- which are not available in 7200rpm but now use 1TB platters (old ones used 800GB platters x5). Good compromise in platter speed, they are still much faster than WD RED or GREEN, use less energy and cost less. The title of this thread is not accurate as there is indeed differences between WD drives these days. WD is losing ground on value and performance.

My personal slant cliffs: 5400rpm WD drives suck, they are slow and they cost more. They are certainly no more reliable by any means and that is a total figment of fanboy imagination; all hard drives are relatively the same in reliability and have been for 25 years. If anything there is more to suspect on the GREEN and WD RED lines since they don't share MFG tech, common parts, or assembly lines with the proven enterprise lines like some of the other 7200rpm drives from Hitachi or Seagate. This is simply for economies of scale issues, and the consumer benefits usually. There is suspect to reliability with WD 5400rpm drives, which can be evidenced in high load unload cycles, issues with Head parking, and a general more common decoration of failed drives by many users. Perhaps the RED line is improved but for all practical purpose there is almost no difference between the RED and the GREEN line except the RED line is marketed towards NAS boxes and servers and has head parking disabled. That issue is removed but hardly worth declaring the RED line advantageous in reliability over Hitachi or Seagate or Toshiba. For many years WD was the king, and there is some strong brand loyalty to them- some only look at WD lines and never look elsewhere when buying a drive so the reality that WD drives are not really that great these days at anything is taking a long time to gain full realization. The myth that was born from clever marketing in previous few years that suggests 5400rpm are more reliable, quieter, or use less energy it total BS IMO. Modern good drives from other MFG are certainly as quiet, and use as less energy as WD 5400rpm drives but hold a serious performance advantage and a serious cost per TB advantage that should not be overlooked or underestimated. Cost per TB, and performance are more important to me personally in purchase decision than energy consumption or noise (only because the energy consumption and noise is nearly the same and non factor). The fear of a hot, noisy drive leads many to buy 5400rpm drives at higher prices and lower performance but the reality you would get a hot noisy drive is very low if you choose wisely.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
post #565 of 884 Old 07-27-2013, 09:11 AM
Member
 
Jsolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 45
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Thanks for the reply. I do agree that drives with larger densities and equal number of platters will be faster. However, things get more blurry when comparing drives with unequal number of platters. That is, lesser aerial density, but more platters (I remember a seagate scsi drive years back, half height ff, 10 platters, 20 heads, 10Krpm. Required active cooling for it not to cook itself!). I think this is the point made in assassin's earlier posts.

Anyways, that aside, i've always been a fan of maxtor until they got assimilated into seagate. Since then, in the last 5 years i've rma'd nearly every seagate (7200.11, .12, and .13 series) compared to 1 or 2 WD's. At least 8 or 9 rma's that I can remember. It is worth mentioning that all the drives I personally use are wd's (for now), and the seagates were all in client's/customer's machines which are subject to higher heat levels. I am a firm believer that inadequate cooling does substantially reduce the life of a drive. All my drives never exceed 37C, most average in the upper 20's to low 30's (10 drives inside the current case). The customer's drives are temps of 40C+. Those inside store built machines (dell/hp/etc..) probably closer to 50C as few actually have a fan blowing on them.

I'm sure there are as many seagate as wd fans. I've had good luck with samsung drives too. Though these days, since seagate bought them out too, I doubt there are many left.

What specific seagate models do you prefer/recommend?

Got 2 wd30ezrx's in a raid1 config. We'll see how long it lasts and the load/unload cycle count.

Reading newegg's drive reviews can be frustrating - for every few good reviews there's an almost equal number of negatives.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=22-148-844&SortField=0&SummaryType=0&Pagesize=10&PurchaseMark=&SelectedRating=-1&VideoOnlyMark=False&VendorMark=&IsFeedbackTab=true&Page=2#scrollFullInfo

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=22-136-874&SortField=0&SummaryType=0&Pagesize=100&PurchaseMark=&SelectedRating=-1&VideoOnlyMark=False&VendorMark=&IsFeedbackTab=true&Keywords=%28keywords%29&Page=1#scrollFullInfo

Seems like a crapshoot either way. Unless the reviewer provides enough details, it's unclear how these drives are actually used, what sort of cooling, etc. Lots of reports of newegg's packaging being poor with hd's. While the drives do have some sort of shock protection in the off state, that too might play a roll in the life span.

In conclusion, if the drive lasts the duration of the warranty, consider yourself lucky. With the much greater capacities in drives now, I doubt many will last 5-10 years (or longer) as drives of the past did.

EDIT: Please reformat your replies with more paragraphs and line feeds. Very difficult to read otherwise.
Jsolo is offline  
post #566 of 884 Old 07-27-2013, 09:21 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 28,480
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 442 Post(s)
Liked: 1740
I'd recommend the 3TB Seagate 7200.14 with 3 1TB platters.

I hear what your saying about the older Seagates, but I firmly believe that older problems are not indicative of current production lines when dealing with PC hardware. If anything it seems like Seagate has improved, and WD has not. There is no contest a Seagate 3TB is a better option for you in RAID1 than your WD GREEN. It's WAYYYYYYYY faster ! It's cheaper. It does not have head parking issues (which you should disable if you have not done so). It even uses the same amount of energy to do it all.

Or- the RED or the Seagate NAS if you wanted a MFG specific option for your purpose. But the 7200.14 doesn't seem to have any trouble in desktop raid set ups. Seagate does not recommend it for enterprise but specifically has recommended it for home RAID set up. $99 for a 3TB at Costco everyday without rebates if you don't mind peeling off the external case.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
post #567 of 884 Old 07-27-2013, 03:24 PM
Advanced Member
 
jim2100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 762
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidT99 View Post

I know the monetary cost is higher but money can be replaced time spent is gone forever.

But replacing money takes time, so either way, you lose. Time is money.
bulls likes this.
jim2100 is offline  
post #568 of 884 Old 08-05-2013, 09:03 PM
Newbie
 
Ronald Li's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
With my limited knowledge and quick research through the internet,

I was thinking of buying a 4 bay NAS and installing 4x3tb or 4x2tb hard drives at raid 5 to fill up with Media for HTPC use

After reading some of these post here, I'm considering seagate. Any suggestions as I was just focusing on WD Red ( marketed for NAS)
Ronald Li is offline  
post #569 of 884 Old 08-06-2013, 05:41 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 28,480
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 442 Post(s)
Liked: 1740
Well Seagate makes a NAS drive too biggrin.gif

Any Seagate should work fine but NAS specific ones are available if you desire

Why RAID 5 ?

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
post #570 of 884 Old 08-06-2013, 05:46 AM
Newbie
 
Ronald Li's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Well Seagate makes a NAS drive too biggrin.gif

Any Seagate should work fine but NAS specific ones are available if you desire

Why RAID 5 ?

Lol i'm old school, used to own maxtor but for the longest time all my drives are WD.Seagate is just foreign to me.

My goal is for low power consumption and obviously reliability. Will only be using it for media storage and if large enough personal stuff.

From my research Raid 5 can rebuild my data if one of my drives crashes? I read raid 10 is the best, but I don't think 4 bay is sufficient enough to sustain that.
Ronald Li is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Home Theater Computers

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off