Hard drive reliability stats - Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

post #1 of 21 (permalink) Old 2014-01-21, 11:14 PM Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 991
Hard drive reliability stats

With so few players left, I did not really expect this much of discrepancy
http://arstechnica.com/information-t...sks-are-equal/

four is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 21 (permalink) Old 2014-01-22, 12:12 PM
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Longueuil
Posts: 832
I see that a recent investment in two external Hitachi 3 TB Turon drives was a wise one.

Going nowhere @ 220 ft
John Koenig is offline  
post #3 of 21 (permalink) Old 2014-01-22, 01:31 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,130
Wow! and I normally get Seagate. I must be real lucky! Time to switch!
j0dest3r is offline  
 
post #4 of 21 (permalink) Old 2014-01-22, 01:33 PM
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 220
I use Seagate 4TB in a dock.. never spins much
pinto is online now  
post #5 of 21 (permalink) Old 2014-01-22, 04:31 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 127.0.0.1
Posts: 3,366
Reliability is often a per-product thing, not a per-company or per-brand thing. There have been hard drives that were released that were horrible from a reliability perspective from many (all?) HDD manufacturers at some point. Remember the IBM Deskstar (aka Deathstar)?

I've got a bunch of Western Digital and Seagate drivers, and I've had drives of each brand "go bad" on me. I've had quite a few WD 2TB "green" drives go bad on me, but I think my stats are skewed because I've purchased so many of them, and I think 4 of the drives I purchased in the same time were part of a bad batch. But they were eventually all replaced under warranty.

One drive I'm still using is a Samsung Spinpoint F1 (1TB), that drive is a real trooper. It gets lots of read/writes over the past 6 years, and hasn't given any SMART errors yet.
audacity is online now  
post #6 of 21 (permalink) Old 2014-01-22, 09:35 PM
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 560
The stats from all companies don't give me any comfort considering effort when one fails. Not totally paranoid though, my WD Caviar (build date:20 Aug 2002) went flaky last week, figure got a good run out of it.
das75 is offline  
post #7 of 21 (permalink) Old 2014-01-23, 12:49 AM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: 43° N, 81.2° W
Posts: 7,842
I've had over 50% of WD 1.5TB and 2.0TB Green drives fail in under 3 years. (About half a dozen drives.) Most failures were in the 2-3yr lifespan. WD has since reduced their warranty on these drives to 2yr. Their 1TB and 500GB drives were rock solid and I still have several WD Green 1TB drives.

I stopped purchasing Seagate drives a few years ago when they shipped a large number of drives with bad firmware and did a bad job of correcting the issue.

Also, similar issues with IBM Deskstar many years ago. They were top rated but IBM suddenly produced a large number of bad drives for no apparent reason. Three out of 4 failed under warranty. The IBM disk drive division was sold to Hitachi. Tried a couple of Hitachi drives but they ran really hot. They may be better now.
ExDilbert is offline  
post #8 of 21 (permalink) Old 2014-01-23, 12:57 AM
tux
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1,329
I've mostly had experience with WD drives in most of my computers. From my experience, they have been very reliable.

With regards to WD, my work has a NAS which had paired WD Green drives since 2009 in RAID 1, they lasted 4 1/2 years before one failed (the other kept running), we replaced them both with WD Red drives. Can't fault WD there, lasted way beyond warranty in a heavy-usage scenario.

On the other hand, my boss got a new Dell last January. They put in a Seagate instead of a WD; it lasted 3 months before it failed. When it failed, the PC unexpectedly rebooted and the drive wouldn't even detect in the BIOS. Dell replaced it, I think with another Seagate, which has been working fine since then.
tux is offline  
post #9 of 21 (permalink) Old 2014-01-28, 06:23 PM
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Parkside-Keele/Bloor Toronto
Posts: 43
The message here is clear: no matter which drive you buy, there is a likelihood of failure, so implement and maintain a backup policy from day 1 !

It's also interesting to note that Seagate and Toshiba are the least expensive ($0.04/GB) providers today followed by WD ($0.041/G) and Hitachi are significantly more expensive at $0.072/G.

The worst (by which I mean most unexpected and catastrophic) failures I've ever had were with Fujitsu and Samsung drives.
newantenna is offline  
post #10 of 21 (permalink) Old 2014-01-28, 09:57 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Scarboro
Posts: 6,331
Quote:
Originally Posted by audacity View Post
Reliability is often a per-product thing, not a per-company or per-brand thing.
Thats true for you and I who have a small sample size, but did you read the article? This is based on Backblaze's experience with over 27,000 consumer grade hard drives. To me that says it is more of a per company thing.
Wayne is offline  
post #11 of 21 (permalink) Old 2014-01-28, 10:19 PM Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 991
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayne View Post
...experience with over 27,000 consumer grade hard drives.
That is the most valuable part of this statistic, I believe.
Helps to decide whether it is reasonable to use WD green drives (for example) in home NAS...
four is offline  
post #12 of 21 (permalink) Old 2014-01-29, 12:17 AM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: 43° N, 81.2° W
Posts: 7,842
Quote:
...experience with over 27,000 consumer grade hard drives.
That chart can be misleading and is incomplete. For starters, why is there no information for WD and Seagate 2TB drives or Hitachi and Seagate 1TB drives? One company may have fairly flat failure rates over their entire product line. Another may have very high failure rates with one particular line or model of drives and very low rates for others. Another may have high failure rates for a particular production facility and not another. My experience is that drive makers often produce 'lemons' at one time or another. The charts need to be broken down by product line, drive model, drive revision and/or production dates to provide any useful information that is useful to consumers.
ExDilbert is offline  
post #13 of 21 (permalink) Old 2014-01-29, 07:40 AM Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 991
How does not using (and having nothing to say about) 1TB Hitachi drives reduces the value of the data for 2/3/4TB Hitachi drives?

The anecdotal evidence: I never doubted that consumer Hitachi drives are better than Seagate (from my 10-20 drives experience).
Even without taking into consideration the bad runs every manufacturer has from time to time...
four is offline  
post #14 of 21 (permalink) Old 2014-01-29, 11:36 AM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 127.0.0.1
Posts: 3,366
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayne View Post
Thats true for you and I who have a small sample size, but did you read the article? This is based on Backblaze's experience with over 27,000 consumer grade hard drives. To me that says it is more of a per company thing.
No, I think it's still a per-product thing then. I have no reason to conclude that every drive Seagate makes is unreliable. The only newsworthy failure rates there 1.5 TB and 3 TB products.

Note that I didn't read the actual Backblaze study, only the Ars Technica report on it.
audacity is online now  
post #15 of 21 (permalink) Old 2014-01-29, 12:36 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: 43° N, 81.2° W
Posts: 7,842
Quote:
How does not using (and having nothing to say about) 1TB Hitachi drives reduces the value of the data for 2/3/4TB Hitachi drives?
I never said it did. I only said it could be misleading and is incomplete. The missing sizes could have failure rates that are radically different that those that are present.
ExDilbert is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










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

Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may 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 On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome