Backblaze Hard Drive Stats for 2017 - HGST HDDs Very Reliable
Click here to post a comment for Backblaze Hard Drive Stats for 2017 - HGST HDDs Very Reliable on our message forum
Koniakki
Venix
had 3xwb 750gb years back all 3 dead on arrival ... click click grrrrrr click click ...dead ...all 3 of em ...and now my bios screaming to backup and replace my wd Blue due to S.M.A.R.T. diagnosis 1tb i have since 2011 or 12 , although already backed up what i wanted from it about a month ago since it suddenly started disappearing from my computer every now and then . hard drives are the luck of the draw most likely over the years you will have a drive at least that will fail no way around that
b101uk
0blivious
I've had drives from every MFG fail on me over the course of about 30 years. To be honest, WD has never seemed much/any better than Seagate. The numbers in these charts look that way too.
Maxtor can go straight to he|| though.
nizzen
Neo Cyrus
Looks like I dodged a bullet with the later 4TB Seagate drives... or maybe not. I got a 4TB SkyHawk, but that's not their bottom of the barrel one. I look forward to the day where everything is solid state or something else which is more reliable.
anticupidon
When we will get the same chart, but with SSDs?
rl66
rl66
b101uk
CalculuS
b101uk
vbetts
Moderator
Alright, back on topic fellas.
TobyR
Well, anyone drawing any kind of brand conclusion on this is running a fools race.
The Seagate sampling is 67,125 total drives. That is just over 73% of *all* the drives tested. WDC only has 662.
There is simply no way the sample sizes are enough to making any meaningful assessment for WDC … the Hitatchi values are the balance and do fair better at the larger volume.
The price point of the drives is also a factor. The Seagates' are all likely running in a high redundancy environment where total deployment of drives matters more than statistical reliability (to a point). If they are 20% less per unit but only have a failure rate of ±.75% the economics are far more important.
This is compounded by the fact that there is *nothing* in the report on ow these drives are used, where, under what issues etc. A manager with a Drobo does not have the same workload as a fileserver at RAID10 or whatever.
Also, the 29% on that Seagate M005 is questionable as it looks like a data entry error, not a calculated value.
rhysiam