Do you trust the large 3-4 TB drives?
- Thread starter katz
- Start date
cypress
Well-Known Member
- Reaction score
- 1,495
- Location
- South Florida
Very true. Backups, Backups, Backups!
PcTek9
Well-Known Member
- Reaction score
- 87
- Location
- Mobile, AL
I can't say it enough times.
Cheap drive bays with fans.
I've seen temps drop from 140 to 90 just by putting a hot drive into a simple cheapy cage with fans on it, and i've seen drives last much longer than their rated time simply by being cooled down all the time.
Cheap drive bays with fans.
I've seen temps drop from 140 to 90 just by putting a hot drive into a simple cheapy cage with fans on it, and i've seen drives last much longer than their rated time simply by being cooled down all the time.
CompConfig
Active Member
- Reaction score
- 83
- Location
- New York City
On two Different machines, one had 2-500GB BLACK DRIVES on the other 2-750GB Red drives. One drive on both of these computer failed in the first year. I have a test server in my office with 4- 1gb green drives and going past the 4th year running 24/ 7. Luck of the draw? There is no logic to it. I was just called in to a new client with a server just past one year old with 4 high end SAS drives and two of them died at one time. And no backup which quickly got the old computer company tossed out.
I have seen in the past working in data centers where sans are running for years and years without a shutdown. Sometimes when they are shutdown for the first time, drives can fail upon startup.
tankman1989
Active Member
- Reaction score
- 5
You should probably rethink the cross your fingers strategy
I kind of agree, lol. I keep checking health status on them. The data isn't vital, it is more of a luxury to some degree and it is all available elsewhere (stored on my DVD's & Blu-Rays). It is just nice having it on HD's for instant access when needed
GTP
Well-Known Member
- Reaction score
- 9,852
- Location
- Adelaide, Australia
phaZed
Well-Known Member
- Reaction score
- 3,159
- Location
- Richmond, VA
TLDR of this thread and the last 7 years:
Large capacity drives are fine.
It's the way that density is achieved that can determine the likelihood of failure:
"Track density" - fitting more data on a single platter, is better.
"Disk density" - Placing 2, 3, 4 or even 5+ platters with read/write heads for each, is much worse. Increased complexity = increased failure due to multiple heads.
IMO, if you're looking for a high capacity drive with the best reliability - the least amount of platters, the better.
Large capacity drives are fine.
It's the way that density is achieved that can determine the likelihood of failure:
"Track density" - fitting more data on a single platter, is better.
"Disk density" - Placing 2, 3, 4 or even 5+ platters with read/write heads for each, is much worse. Increased complexity = increased failure due to multiple heads.
IMO, if you're looking for a high capacity drive with the best reliability - the least amount of platters, the better.
glennd
Well-Known Member
- Reaction score
- 2,527
- Location
- South West Victoria Australia
Does that win any awards?
Larry Sabo
Well-Known Member
- Reaction score
- 3,413
- Location
- Ottawa, Canada
Not to mention that he's trying to do it over a USB 2.0 USB-SATA adapter! @Kitten Kong
NviGate Systems
Well-Known Member
- Reaction score
- 1,165
- Location
- Vancouver
Yeah, 640GB, 1.5TB, 3TB, avoid like the plague.
britechguy
Well-Known Member
- Reaction score
- 4,883
- Location
- Staunton, VA
My 3 TB WD external USB HDD is chugging along every bit as well as my Toshiba 2 TB one does.
While there are definitely certain models, in certain capacities, that are to be avoided due to their track records, I have seen nothing convincing that certain capacities are, themselves, more prone to failure.
While there are definitely certain models, in certain capacities, that are to be avoided due to their track records, I have seen nothing convincing that certain capacities are, themselves, more prone to failure.
You could have looked at a kimsufi server, for peanuts a month they have at least a 500 gig drive and transfer stuff at backbone speeds, choice of OS systems, but you have to setup everything other than the OS yourself.
That's for OS releases
WD had issues some years ago following flood damage to the manufacturing plants, they had everything refurbed but the inital post flood drives drives would rapidly loose data
I tried to RMA one back then bought from a reputable UK supplier but WD said the drive was from a batch sold in china and RMA had to be done via China
I have since solved many Chinese issues due to having a wife from China and so I have relatives there
That depends on the numbering system that has ended up with Win 10 being 10
A Pentium 1 may have been used to calculate windows versions
sapphirescales
Well-Known Member
- Reaction score
- 3,337
- Location
- At My Computer
I thought it was weird that OP called a 3-4TB hard drive "large." Heck, I don't even personally use anything smaller than 8TB nowadays and most of my drives are 12TB - 14TB!
Similar threads
