Looking to replace both my 2GB Seagate non NAS ST2000DM001 drives in my 2 bay Synology DS212+ as they are just RAID 0 @ 4GB and want to use Raid 1 for data protection. Want to permanently archive stuff off my system and free up some storage. Can only use RAID 1 (only 2 bays) so would like a pair of 6TB NAS drives and wondered if the 6TB Reds are recommended! Obviously one drive is for mirroring and the other for data, so need drives suited to NAS use. Seagate have their 6TB Enterprise drives but cost twice as much as the Reds (£400) so obviously the Reds are the preferred option for home use. Anadtech has a review but seem they had one fail, which looks to be the same problem the 4TB Reds suffered from, oh dear, that's muddied the water!
Still haven't found one either for sale around here (6TB drives, except that insanely expensive helium one). My Seagate 4TB is still doing fine though (Always test your HDD's, even if new, before putting anything on it tbh).
What Issues are they suffering from? This is news to me. I've been using the 4TB Red drives in a raid 10 array for almost a year without any issues and I plan to upgrade to the 6TB versions once they come out.
Waiting on the 6tb greens to come into stock. Was waiting for the Seagate 5tb's but still no stock in the UK. Seagate can now suck my balls
They was a spout of DOA red drives, caused by newegg workers mishandling them during packing process etc
Many in stock in Norway @ komplett.no https://www.komplett.no/wd-red-6tb-nas-drive/820568 Asus ROG swift is also in stock in Norway
Reviews on SCAN show some 4TB Reds with failures and they also have the 6TB Reds in stock for £209 :banana: It's like a Bet Fair AD, Do you? Don't you? Crazy price for the Seagate 6TB though :thumbdown
Caved in and bought 2 x 6TB Reds, not from Scan though, from a company I thought sold digital radios £408 delivered!
Well mine turned up today, found the postman had dumped them on the kitchen floor as the back door was open so he kindly left them for me!! I'm backing up data off the NAS to some 500GB USB drives (they are USB 2.0 but plugged into a USB 3.0 port on my Win 8.1 box) and after every file copy operation the transfer 'pauses' but the activity light on the USB is still flashing suggesting windows is 'guessing' the transfer time and falls short every time! Also, i'm getting about 90MB/s to the USB from the NAS but then about halfway through the whole transfer (could be 1 file or more) it drops to about 40MB/s until it completes and does the 'pause' thing again? Same happens if I use USB 2.0 ports? Caching is set to Direct but seems windows IS caching something! Eventually i'll get the damn drives in sometime today and setup for RAID1, but at this rate it might be tonight!! *UPDATE* Well due to the stupidity of my USB drives the backup of 1.6TB took most of the day, plus smaller files choke throughput down 2-3MB/s and even into KB/s, ridiculous. Seems you have to store ISO's and large video files to get anywhere near gig speeds, so if you have gigs of MP3s or photos to backup to an external USB drive then it might take a day or two!! So about 10:30pm I stripped the Synology down as it's an utter dust trap!! Had to take the case off to clean the insides of dust, it was thick and full of dust bunnies, the fan was choked with dust too! So about 11pm got the drives installed and DSM updated to the latest version and left it checking the RAID1 Volume just in case there are bad sectors that need mapping out! Just checked it now at 11:30am UK time, so about 12hrs later, and it's done 63% of it's verification/data scrubbing cycle so looks like it will be close to this evening when it's done that and can restore my config and files! It's nice having about 5.5TB but the time it takes to check it is a complete farce! It's also time the industry was stopped from using 1,000,000 bytes as a megabyte and 1,000,000,000 as a gigabyte and quoting 'unformatted' capacities which mean nothing!! They were made to state the viewable diagonal area on monitors so you got a 17" or 22" monitor yet they are still allowed to lie/mis-represent the capacity of hard drives?