1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Backblaze reports Q3 2017 HDD Failure results - includes 12 TB Drives as well

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Nov 1, 2017.

  1. Hilbert Hagedoorn

    Hilbert Hagedoorn Don Vito Corleone Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,297
    Likes Received:
    4,433
    GPU:
    AMD | NVIDIA
  2. easytomy

    easytomy Member

    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    8
    GPU:
    AMD
    Can someone please explain what "Drive days" means? 'cause if that's the time the drive has been operating... some of them have been working since over 8600 years ago... :))
     
  3. IMSupervisor

    IMSupervisor New Member

    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    GTX 970
    If you have 100 drives and run them for a week, you have 700 days of usage.
     
  4. Robbo9999

    Robbo9999 Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,240
    Likes Received:
    195
    GPU:
    GTX1070 @2050Mhz
    Take home message is that you don't want a 4TB Seagate drive!
     
    KissSh0t likes this.

  5. easytomy

    easytomy Member

    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    8
    GPU:
    AMD
    So: "Drive days" / "Drive count" = single drive operating time?
    For the Seagate in question: 3.152.542 / 33.510 = 94 days ???

    So every 3 Seagate drives out of 100, are dead after just 3 months of non-stop work???
     
  6. nevcairiel

    nevcairiel Master Guru

    Messages:
    559
    Likes Received:
    173
    GPU:
    MSI 1080 Gaming X
    Not all drives were installed on the same day, so at best thats an average, but its unclear if there is a bunch of really old ones and a bunch of new ones, for example.
     
  7. KissSh0t

    KissSh0t Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,758
    Likes Received:
    1,149
    GPU:
    ASUS RX 470 Strix
    Interesting stats... gotta love Seagate..
     
  8. FeDaYin

    FeDaYin Active Member

    Messages:
    68
    Likes Received:
    9
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 780 ref.
    As you can see, Seagate sells way more drives than any company.
     
  9. Kaarme

    Kaarme Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,506
    Likes Received:
    398
    GPU:
    Sapphire 390
    Yeah. Seagate must have built in their 4TB drives some ingenious timed breaking functionality, to sell more drives as replacements.
     
  10. AlmondMan

    AlmondMan Master Guru

    Messages:
    439
    Likes Received:
    26
    GPU:
    Sapphire 480 Nitro+
    Guess you aren't too smart, then :p
     

  11. xIcarus

    xIcarus Master Guru

    Messages:
    935
    Likes Received:
    88
    GPU:
    1080 Ti AORUS
    Holy cock those Seagate 4TB drives. So if I understand it correctly, 1/3 of them fail within a year of usage?
     
    Loophole35 likes this.
  12. heffeque

    heffeque Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,915
    Likes Received:
    19
    GPU:
    nVidia MX150
    You, sir, look like a really honest and intelligent person. People like you make the world a better place.
     
  13. KissSh0t

    KissSh0t Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,758
    Likes Received:
    1,149
    GPU:
    ASUS RX 470 Strix
    Sell a lot of drives, get a lot of dead drives... makes sense I guess.

    After all 4 of my seagates had the click of death I won't be purchasing that brand again ( ◉ - ◉ )
     
  14. xrodney

    xrodney Master Guru

    Messages:
    324
    Likes Received:
    46
    GPU:
    Aorus 1080ti xtreme
    I have all my 14 WD drives dead, from seagate only 4 and those were from same problematic 3TB batch and all of them were showing symptoms in SMART prior of being unusable unlike WD which just died instantly or with very little warning from SMART.
    In my main rig currently running 6 Seagate drives (3/6/10TB) with average 20k-40k hours of operations running (24x7) operations and none showing any issues so far.
    Though none of those are cheapest desktop drives variants.

    My future disks most likely will be again 10TB+ Helium based Baracuda pro.
     
  15. Picolete

    Picolete Master Guru

    Messages:
    253
    Likes Received:
    52
    GPU:
    R9 290 Sapphire Tri-x
    That seems acurate, i have changed hundreds in CCTV machines
     

  16. SoloCreep

    SoloCreep Master Guru

    Messages:
    683
    Likes Received:
    12
    GPU:
    RTX 2080 TI
    Every Seagate I've ever owned has failed.
     
  17. slyphnier

    slyphnier Master Guru

    Messages:
    597
    Likes Received:
    34
    GPU:
    GTX1070
    wat WD you been using ? Green or Blue i guess?
    if yes, wonder if any relation to hdd park that wd claims for saving power

    i use WD black, i know price abit high, but i am prefer paying abit more for reliability
    most HDD depends on workload, should at least working without any issue for 16k hours (2years)
    on light workload/use then we can expect it last 4~5years which is within hdd warranty (black series)

    green and blue only have 2/3years warranty, so we can simply the company also confidence their product working within the warranty
     
  18. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,155
    Likes Received:
    597
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    Makes me feel a little better about my recent Toshiba purchase. It was Between them and HSGT.
     
  19. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    4,012
    Likes Received:
    1,032
    GPU:
    HIS R9 290
    To my understanding, this data is based on whenever the drives report a failure, regardless of whether or not the failure was just a fluke or if drive is still usable. When I worked at IBM, a lot of companies didn't feel like taking their chances with any errors; they just toss the drives as soon as they report any semblance of inadequacy.
    In my experience, Seagate has a lot more SMART stats, and they're more picky about what they deem a failure vs competitors. If you're someone who doesn't like to take chances with data, Seagate is good because they let you know of a potential problem long before it actually fails, but, most of the time the problems they report can be ignored.

    As for whether or not Seagate drives actually fail more often than other drives (to the point where they are incapable of being used or trusted) I'm not really sure. I personally have used HDDs from all brands where they had long-term or major SMART errors and they operated just fine for many years, or have yet to actually fail. And no, I don't use these drives for anything important.
     
  20. TieSKey

    TieSKey Active Member

    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    15
    GPU:
    Gtx870m 3Gb
    If they mix together new and old drives, I don't see how this tables can be of any use ....

    Example:
    Brand A has 50 disks 5 years old and 50 1 year old. Then 20 disks fail so fail rate is 20% on average 250 disk years.
    Brand B has 100 disks 3 year old. Then 20 disks fail, so fail rate is 20% on average 250 disk years.

    Brand A and B would look identical in those tables but A is actually more reliable than B in the case only old disks fail, or terrible worse than B if the failing ones are the newer......
     
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2017

Share This Page