Guru3D.com
  • HOME
  • NEWS
    • Channels
    • Archive
  • DOWNLOADS
    • New Downloads
    • Categories
    • Archive
  • GAME REVIEWS
  • ARTICLES
    • Rig of the Month
    • Join ROTM
    • PC Buyers Guide
    • Guru3D VGA Charts
    • Editorials
    • Dated content
  • HARDWARE REVIEWS
    • Videocards
    • Processors
    • Audio
    • Motherboards
    • Memory and Flash
    • SSD Storage
    • Chassis
    • Media Players
    • Power Supply
    • Laptop and Mobile
    • Smartphone
    • Networking
    • Keyboard Mouse
    • Cooling
    • Search articles
    • Knowledgebase
    • More Categories
  • FORUMS
  • NEWSLETTER
  • CONTACT

New Reviews
Fractal Design Focus 2 chassis review
Scythe Mugen 5 Rev.C CPU Cooler review
be quiet Pure Loop 2 FX 280mm LCS review
HP FX900 1 TB NVMe Review
Scythe FUMA2 Rev.B CPU Cooler review
SK Hynix Platinum P41 2TB M.2 NVMe SSD Review
Corsair K70 RGB PRO Mini Wireless review
MSI MPG A1000G - 1000W PSU Review
Goodram IRDM PRO M.2 SSD 2 TB NVMe SSD Review
Samsung T7 Shield Portable 1TB USB SSD review

New Downloads
Corsair Utility Engine Download (iCUE) Download v4.27.168
Download Intel network driver package 27.6
AMD Radeon Software Adrenalin 22.8.1 driver download
Prime95 download version 30.8 build 16
Memtest86 9.5 download
Intel ARC graphics Driver Download Version: 30.0.101.1743
GeForce 516.94 WHQL driver download
Display Driver Uninstaller Download version 18.0.5.4
FurMark Download v1.31
Intel HD graphics Driver Download Version: 31.0.101.3222


New Forum Topics
Intel Arc A580 Appearing in AotS Benchmark Database, Comparable to RTX 3050/3060 AMD's Possible Delay Ryzen 7000 to September 27th might be BIOS related Windows power plan settings explorer utility [3rd-Party Driver] Amernime Zone Radeon Release Nemesis 22.6.1 WHQL DriverPack (22.7.1 pending ...) Latest Nvidia Drivers trigger multiple WMI Errors on PC startup and wake up! Fine Utilise Power of RadeonPRO Software & SweetFX Part 2 In 2024, 1TB DDR5 RAM will be available, followed by DDR5-7200 RAM in 2025 says Samsung AMD Ryzen 7950X, 7900X, 7700X and 7600X Zen4 processors pricing at Canada etailer Extreme 4-Way Sli Tuning NZXT N7 Z690, a beautiful motherboard with full cover




Guru3D.com » News » Backblaze report: 8-terabyte HDDs lasting a long time - HGST Most Reliable

Backblaze report: 8-terabyte HDDs lasting a long time - HGST Most Reliable

by Hilbert Hagedoorn on: 02/01/2017 10:02 AM | source: | 10 comment(s)
Backblaze report: 8-terabyte HDDs lasting a long time - HGST Most Reliable

Online and cloud service provider Backblaze released a new listing of HDD failure rates for Q4 2017. At the end of 2016 they had 73,653 spinning hard drives. Of that number, there were 1,553 boot drives and 72,100 data drives. 

Data shows that 8TB models had fewer failures (1.65%) then smaller versions. Also failures overall compared to the last few years seem to have declined (1.94%). The 8TB HDDs mostly used are the Seagate ST8000DM002:
  

 
Backplaze has decided the phase out HDDs smaller then 3 TB, hence the lacking results. A HDD that has seen large failure rates however is the 
ST4000DX000 with 13.57%, it was a 3 years old series though.

Despite failure rates remained high for Seagate, there was one party with even higher failure rates, Western Digital with 3.88% of all HDDs. HGST remains the most reliable brand, but the irony is that they are owned by WD.

 

 
At the end of Q4 2016 Backblaze was monitoring 72,100 data drives. For our evaluation we remove from consideration those drives which were used for testing purposes and those drive models for which we did not have at least 45 drives. This leaves us with 71,939 production hard drives.

---

In Q4 2016 we introduced a third 8 TB drive model, the Seagate ST8000NM0055. This is an enterprise class drive. One 60-drive Storage Pod was deployed mid-Q4 and the initial results look promising as there have been no failures to date. Given our past disdain for overpaying for enterprise drives, it will be interesting to see how these drives perform.

We added 3,540 Seagate 8 TB drives, model ST8000DM002, giving us 8,660 of these drives. That’s 69 petabytes of raw storage, before formatting and encoding, or about 22% of our current data storage capacity. The failure rate for the quarter of these 8 TB drives was a very respectable 1.65%. That’s lower than the Q4 failure rate of 1.94% for all of the hard drives in the table above.

During the next couple of calendar quarters we’ll monitor how the new enterprise 8 TB drives compare to the consumer 8 TB drives. We’re interested to know which models deliver the best value and we bet you are too. We’ll let you know what we find.

2016 Hard Drive Performance Statistics

Looking back over 2016, we added 15,646 hard drives, and migrated 110 Storage Pods (4,950 drives) from 1-, 1.5-, and 2 TB drives to 4-, 6- and 8 TB drives. Below are the hard drive failure stats for 2016. As with the quarterly results, we have removed any non-production drives and any models that had less than 45 drives.

n 2016, three drives models ended the year with zero failures, albeit with a small number of drives. Both the 4 TB Toshiba and the 8 TB HGST models went the entire year without a drive failure. The 8 TB Seagate (ST8000NM0055) drives, which were deployed in November 2016, also recorded no failures.

The total number of failed drives was 1,225 for the year. That’s 3.36 drive failures per day or about 5 drives per workday, a very manageable workload. Of course, that’s easy for me to say, since I am not the one swapping out drives.

The overall hard drive failure rate for 2016 was 1.95%. That’s down from 2.47% in 2015 and well below the 6.39% failure rate for 2014.

Big Drives Rule

We increased storage density by moving to higher-capacity drives. That helped us end 2016 with 3 TB drives being the smallest density drives in our data centers. During 2017, we will begin migrating from the 3.0 TB drives to larger-sized drives. Here’s the distribution of our hard drives in our data centers by size for 2016.




Backblaze report: 8-terabyte HDDs lasting a long time - HGST Most Reliable Backblaze report: 8-terabyte HDDs lasting a long time - HGST Most Reliable Backblaze report: 8-terabyte HDDs lasting a long time - HGST Most Reliable Backblaze report: 8-terabyte HDDs lasting a long time - HGST Most Reliable




« NVIDIA Bundles For Honor & Ghost Recon Wildlands · Backblaze report: 8-terabyte HDDs lasting a long time - HGST Most Reliable · AMD Fourth Quarter and Annual 2016 Financial Results »

2 pages 1 2


Razer82
Junior Member



Posts: 1
Joined: 2017-02-01

#5387250 Posted on: 02/01/2017 10:16 AM
If I am not mistaken, I believe that Toshiba bought the HGST 3.5-inch business from WD because of requirements of regulatory agencies.
So I think reliability is on the side of Toshiba.

slyphnier
Senior Member



Posts: 813
Joined: 2009-11-30

#5387297 Posted on: 02/01/2017 12:01 PM
If I am not mistaken, I believe that Toshiba bought the HGST 3.5-inch business from WD because of requirements of regulatory agencies.
So I think reliability is on the side of Toshiba.

its quite complex but its safe to say HGST = WD

based http://www.enhancedonlinenews.com/portal/site/eon/permalink/?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20120228007152&newsLang=en&permalinkExtra=
OR
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HGST
In May 2012, WD divested to Toshiba assets that enabled Toshiba to manufacture and sell 3.5-inch hard drives for the desktop and consumer electronics markets to address the requirements of regulatory agencies

so toshiba making their own 3.5 HDD, thats why on early take over there lots rebranded hitachi hdd, there no longer now
we can say toshiba hdd = hitachi hdd, as its using hgst asset to manufacture their hdd

but hitachi hdd is not toshiba hdd
so cant say hitachi hdd same to toshiba hdd / reliability, as toshiba not producing hitachi hdd

coth
Senior Member



Posts: 540
Joined: 2005-02-23

#5387301 Posted on: 02/01/2017 12:09 PM
45 drives isn't really statistics

Kaarme
Senior Member



Posts: 2982
Joined: 2013-03-10

#5387348 Posted on: 02/01/2017 02:33 PM
its quite complex but its safe to say HGST = WD


Considering WD seems to be falling behind in reliability, it seems like all of their efforts go to the king HGST, while the consumer WD branded drives are an afterthought. Or maybe this is a purposeful action, to remain both in the more expensive (profitable) business, but also to cut costs mercilessly.

Ma Lau
Junior Member



Posts: 4
Joined: 2017-02-01

#5387369 Posted on: 02/01/2017 03:05 PM
Red herrings?

The numbers are difficult to use and draw out conclusions. It seems the report does not show failure rates of drives at 1-year-old, 2-year-old etc.

E.g. The numbers are showing that older drives have higher failure rates. However we are more interested to know which brand/model has more reliable drives, all else being equal including age.

Or have I misunderstood something?

2 pages 1 2


Post New Comment
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.


Guru3D.com © 2022