... The 3TB drives are still at 9%, compared to 1% for Hitachi and 3% for WD. It doesn't disprove the fact that Hitachi also performed much better than both WD and Seagate for all capacities.
Basically Seagate's most unreliable large volume drives (1.5TB, 3TB) were cpmared against Hitachi/WD. That chart would look a lot different if the Seagate's had been 1TB and 2TB models, but Backblaze look for the cheapest deals...and ended up with standard Hitachi and crap Seagate/WD. I forgot to mention WD took over Hitachi in 2012 then more recently Toshiba. Half the Hitachi drives could have been made by WD....not sure about that though. I'm just saying it's not a fair comparison.
Does having unreliable 3TB drives somehow excuse Seagates poor reliability stats then? 3TB is a pretty damn common hard drive size, and one that makes sense in the prize/capacity sense.
Yes it does if the more reliable models are the biggest sellers. sure a specific unit may have done poorly in a specific test, but you can't base a whole companies rep on specifics. If Seagate (theretically) export twice as many 1 and 2TB drives as the 1.5/3TB models tested, is it then fair to say they are the bottom ranking hard drive maker?
my seagate drives that died on me were 1.5tb internal and 1.5tb external. the 1.5tb internal replacements are working including 1 2tb to replace a 1.5tb and a 1.5tb external was replaced with a 2tb external. I do not think I would buy another seagate but their rma service is acceptable actually pretty good rma service tbh
No, but the article neatly breaks each drive into its own graph, so you can see for yourself how reliable each of the models have been for this company. I said I agree the headline is a tad misleading, but then it would appear that, for this company and their use, Hitachi has been a... ****ofalot more reliable than both Seagate and WD, regardless of the models in question.
Unsurprised. Out of 150 new base units at work with all Seagate HDD's we've had 8 fail with cyclic redundancy checks. They're pretty damn quick at repairing the HDD's and sending them back out though I'll admit!
I just lost the OS partition on a 160 GB seagate hard disk. It's quite old indeed, almost 8 years already. I moved the OS to a Hitachi
I'm not just a Home user i spend a lot of time working with VMS and know a fair few owners of Hosting Company's for VM and Dedi's and from my knowledge my own VM has Seagate drives so i dunno. Point is article is misleading and its sources title is the same. http://arstechnica.com/information-...ty-to-the-test-shows-not-all-disks-are-equal/
i would say many years ago seagate failed often but in recent years i have been using seagate and samsung with no problems and my pc is on everyday and i game a lot on those drives ...still using them but bought 2 ssd of late to improve performance ...i would say hitachi drives fail more often in my past
Most of my hard drives are from 2005.. they are all Western Digital. and a Green Series Western Digital from 2009. Western Digital are very reliable in my experience... I cannot say much for Seagate though... all my seagate drives have died.
There is something fishy about this article,some data seems ...too well presented in a certain fashion,and lacks some important details. I call misleading....but what do i know about storage,the masters at Backblaze seems that they are on someone's payroll.
Lol .. same here with my seagates. Anything purchased after 2005 is dead. I even have to pay a premium for WD over here .. anything but Seagate please!!
It will be very ,very nice to hear some hands on opinions from a data recovery house,they can tell you what is what about each brand. Storage will fail,it is a fact.Getting the data back from a specific drive/brand is where one should look,at least form end user point if view.A datacenter will have another opinion,for sure. Did anyone knew that last drivers from WD are a royal pain in the arse to recover data from?
I have 2x 150gb WD Raptors that have been running 24/7 in raid 0 for 8 years. I bought them in 2006 and they're still running great. I've also got 2x WD Black 1tb RE drives, running 24/7 for about 5 years. No issues. And another 2x 640gb WD Black drives that have about 6 years on them. Running fine. I deal with customers problematic computers on a daily basis and from my experience, the lease reliable hard drives are Toshiba. Second would be Seagate. Winner would be WD.
I was always under the impression WD was the most reliable. I was always fine with paying a bit more for them as I've never had any issues.
I have a 750gb Segate Barracuda drive that is my system drive for over 3 years now almost 4 and never had any problems with it. I had only 1 drive die on me which was an old 200gb IDE segate drive it wasnt completely dead it was in the middle of the dying phase. I thought of getting a 3tb Seagate Barracuda 3tb drive but i am going to reconsider my decision and look at other drives such as the hitachi drives or the WD caviar black.
