# HDD bytes per sector types; 512e vs 512n vs 4Kn?



## videobruce (Apr 7, 2019)

I'm in the market for a replacement HDD; 4TB vs 2TB. I settled for Seagate Enterprise. The 3 models are the same price & same warranty $150 5yrs,

The types are
512e (emulated),
512n (native) and
4Kn 4096 native

I have many a few good articles on the differences sine this aspect never came up before, 20 years playing around with computers. I only looked at manufacture, capacity, interface, speed, & warranty.

I'm running Win7 Pro (still), I may go to W10, but that is a maybe. The drives I have currently are one SSD and two Hitachi 2TB with a 512 BPS spec. I looked up the specs and all that is provided is "512", not 512e or 512n. So I don't know what they are. The drives models numbers are identical except for the last digit; 0 vs 1;
*Hitachi HUA723020ALA640*

From what I have read, 521e is the way to go for current compatibility.But, that seems debatable according to the articles. This replacement will be a 'storage' drive and it seemed that a 4096 BPS would be the better choice.

The Seagate Enterprise choices are;
ST4000NM0115     
ST4000NM0085
ST4000NM0035

* Input please.*


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Apr 8, 2019)

it's a storage drive, I think you're over complicating it for no reason, look for the one with the best reviews and warranty for your budget /thread. in fact you don't even need enterprise drive, grab a barracuda, WD black or whatever the best consumer HDD is for your budget.


----------



## Shihab (Apr 8, 2019)

Do they even make native 512 drives anymore?
At any rate, if you're sticking with Win7 and planning to use it for long (obligatory disclaimer that this is not recommended), go with the 512e. Microsoft's official statement is that native AF drives are NOT SUPPORTED.

Besides, whatever gains you get from 4K sectors you already have even with a logical 512 sectors.


----------



## videobruce (Apr 8, 2019)

NdMk2o1o said:


> I think you're over complicating it for no reason


Maybe, but the points that were made seemed valid. As to the choices for Enterprise was simply cost & warranty. WD's 'Black" 4TB is around $20 more.


Shihabyooo said:


> Microsoft's official statement is that native AF drives are NOT SUPPORTED


Are you referring to 512n drives?


----------



## Shihab (Apr 8, 2019)

The other one. AF (Advanced format) are 4K, native or otherwise.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Format


----------



## johnspack (Apr 8, 2019)

4k is best for gpt partitioning,  which you will need to use.  That means you can't use it as a boot drive under windows 7.
And for those above,  gpt partitioned,  4k formatted storage drives work just fine under windows 7.


----------



## Flaky (Apr 8, 2019)

Well, actually one of the benefits of 4Kn is that drive can be bigger than 2TB and be fully accessible when partitioned using MBR.

Aside from that, it hard to find a good reason for going 4Kn. Almost no gain, but minimal risk of compatibility related to certain software.
Stick to 512e.

512e was supposed to be a transitive format, but it seems it's going to stay forever


----------



## Jetster (Apr 8, 2019)

Ask SuperSoph_WD


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Apr 8, 2019)

Stick to WD though, I know a guy that does pro data recovery, including for the UK police, and he said to me don't buy Seagate as they are the worst for fails. He also said, if you can't afford WD Blacks, buy WD Blues as they are not far off the performance of Blacks


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 8, 2019)

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us...t-policy-for-4k-sector-hard-drives-in-windows

Windows 7: 
512n = Supported
512e = Supported if KB982018 or Service Pack 1 is installed.
4Kn = Not Supported
everything else = Not Supported

ST4000NM0115 512e
ST4000NM0085 4Kn
ST4000NM0035  512n

The Hitachis you have are likely 512n.  3+ TB is where 512n becomes inadequate.  I doubt 512n is available on drives larger than 4 TB because integrity information takes too much space on the platters.

If you have W7 SP1 installed, I would probably go with ST4000NM0115 (the 512e drive).


Edit: Out of curiosity, because Windows 10 never asked me, I wondered what my 12 TB Seagate Exos was...






Row|512n|512n|512e|4Kn
bytes per sector|512|512|512|4096
bytes per physical sector|not supported|512|4096|4096The drive above is 512e.  My 275 GB SSD is 512n.

This article explains everything: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/wi...dvanced-format--4k--disk-compatibility-update

4Kn are super rare outside of mainframe clusters.  The industry has apparently decided that 512e is the norm.


----------



## videobruce (Apr 8, 2019)

Shihabyooo said:


> The other one. AF (Advanced format) are 4K, native or otherwise.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Format


That makes no mention of 512n types.



johnspack said:


> 4k is best for gpt partitioning,  which you will need to use.  That means you can't use it as a boot drive under windows 7.
> And for those above,  gpt partitioned,  4k formatted storage drives work just fine under windows 7.


I was already figuring GPT. I wouldn't use that size HDD for a 'boot' drive even when partitioned.


----------



## Flaky (Apr 8, 2019)

videobruce said:


> That makes no mention of 512n types.


Through the article, those drives are referred to as legacy 512 byte sector ones.
512n is not listed as advanced format variant, because it is not an advanced format variant


----------



## videobruce (Apr 8, 2019)

tigger said:


> Stick to WD though, I know a guy that does pro data recovery, including for the UK police, and he said to me don't buy Seagate as they are the worst for fails. He also said, if you can't afford WD Blacks, buy WD Blues as they are not far off the performance of Blacks


Funny you mentioned that, my local IT guy (whom I known for 20 years since I bought my first custom built tower from) says just the opposite.
He had humongous issues with WD drives and WD's customer service years ago. He only buys Seagate.   I was originally leaning towards SG, but I still considered WD.  One other thing I feel is important; I don't like supporting semi-monopolies, where one company commands the field (no thanks to out of control de-regulation). The main reason I stuck with AMD, *NO* Wintel for me!

Here is an article from Seagate that I found interesting;
https://www.seagate.com/tech-insights/advanced-format-4k-sector-hard-drives-master-ti/

These are the drives that I already mentioned. It was the 1st time I saw those additional 'types' listed;


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Apr 8, 2019)

My friend, said seagate is owned by hitachi or vice versa, since the flood that caused them a lot of headache, their drives have been rubbish. I was just passing on the info 

This is worth a look too-
https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-failure-rates-q1-2017/


----------



## videobruce (Apr 8, 2019)

When was that flood?

*From Wikipedia* relevant quotes;
"March 2011, Western Digital agreed to acquire the storage unit of Hitachi, HGST"
"December 2011, Seagate acquired Samsung's HDD business."
"March 2012, Western Digital completed the acquisition of HGST."
"May 2012 Western Digital divested assets to manufacture and sell certain 3.5-inch hard drives for the desktop and consumer electronics markets to Toshiba."
"February 2016, Seagate was hit with class action lawsuit over the defective hard drives they sold."
"January 2017, Seagate announced the shutdown at Suzhou, China - one of its largest HDD assembly plants "

As to* 512e vs 4Kn*; I think I should of started a pole; 512e 2, 4Kn 1


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 8, 2019)

tigger said:


> My friend, said seagate is owned by hitachi or vice versa, since the flood that caused them a lot of headache, their drives have been rubbish. I was just passing on the info



Hitachi GST is owned by WD.  SLIGHTLY different.

In the case of the drives you are choosing, you will really want an Advanced Format drive of type 512e.  The platter is denser for AF on that model (better performance) and it will work with Windows 7.


----------



## videobruce (Apr 8, 2019)

Are Hitachi labels drives even being sold anymore?? (Not refirbished, but brand new.)


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 8, 2019)

videobruce said:


> Are Hitachi labels drives even being sold anymore?? (Not refirbished, but brand new.)



Yes.  Western Digital still operates the brand for mobile and server markets (Travelstar and Ultrastar) at least.

I have a post aquisition Ultrastar in my rig right now...


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 8, 2019)

videobruce said:


> As to* 512e vs 4Kn*; I think I should of started a pole; 512e 2, 4Kn 1


Just get 512e and be merry.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Apr 8, 2019)

R-T-B said:


> Hitachi GST is owned by WD.  SLIGHTLY different.
> 
> In the case of the drives you are choosing, you will really want an Advanced Format drive of type 512e.  The platter is denser for AF on that model (better performance) and it will work with Windows 7.



Ok, he did tell me but I must have confused myself.



videobruce said:


> When was that flood?
> 
> *From Wikipedia* relevant quotes;
> "March 2011, Western Digital agreed to acquire the storage unit of Hitachi, HGST"
> ...




https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/oct/25/thailand-floods-hard-drive-shortage


----------



## videobruce (Apr 8, 2019)

Almost 8 years ago. Ancient history.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Apr 8, 2019)

videobruce said:


> Almost 8 years ago. Ancient history.



Ancient history maybe, but he said, since the flood, their(seagate) drives have not been as good. Also if you looked at the link I posted to the reliability site, seagate was the worst. read some of the comments.
https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-failure-rates-q1-2017/


----------



## videobruce (Apr 8, 2019)

That was Q1 2017, Q3 2018 (current) is here;
https://www.backblaze.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Q3-2018-Lifetime-Chart-2.png

Looks as WD is worse.


----------



## Shihab (Apr 8, 2019)

Backblaze's data should be taken too carefully (and sometimes with a grain of salt), imo. Between 2018 and 2017, the picture has dramatically changed. And I really doubt their drive numbers are enough to be considered a good, representative sample size (for some skus/manufacterers), without going into the "random" part...


----------



## videobruce (Apr 8, 2019)

Understood, SG has changed their 'Constellation" series from a year or better ago.

Your post 'hiccuped'


----------



## agent_x007 (Apr 8, 2019)

Also, there are no new 7200RPM WD "Blue" drives 
Last one is WD10EZEX (1TB).


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Apr 8, 2019)

videobruce said:


> That was Q1 2017, Q3 2018 (current) is here;
> https://www.backblaze.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Q3-2018-Lifetime-Chart-2.png
> 
> Looks as WD is worse.



Seagate 4TB drives 3,317 failures, show me how WD is worse?


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 8, 2019)

tigger said:


> Seagate 4TB drives 3,317 failures, show me how WD is worse?



By not cherry picking one model, mainly.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Apr 8, 2019)

R-T-B said:


> By not cherry picking one model, mainly.



The highest number of fails in that chart where seagate, not cherry picked at all. Even if you add all the rest together, its no where near the same number.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 8, 2019)

tigger said:


> The highest number of fails in that chart where seagate, not cherry picked at all. Even if you add all the rest together, its no where near the same number.



It's called averaging.


----------



## Shihab (Apr 8, 2019)

Technically, it is, since you're comparing a manufacturer's performance based on one SKU.
With that said, failure count alone doesn't mean anything, you need percentages for that.

Edit: An SKU that shouldn't be considered in this comparison to begin with. Wasn't there people ranting a while back about BackBlaze using consumer-grade drives in enterprise/server environment?


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Apr 8, 2019)

Look in the chart at all the drives with the highest fails, all Seagate, nuff said


----------



## videobruce (Apr 8, 2019)

tigger said:


> Seagate 4TB drives 3,317 failures, show me how WD is worse?


Look at percentages. Counts are meaningless.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 8, 2019)

tigger said:


> Look in the chart at all the drives with the highest fails, all Seagate, nuff said



Also used more seagates than anyone else but hey, lets read one row and call it a day...


----------



## videobruce (Apr 8, 2019)

I think we have a Seagate hater here. I wonder who he voted for?


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Apr 8, 2019)

The WD 6TB have the highest % fails at 4%, but the highest % fails for 4TB are seagate. Overall Seagate are still the worst.



videobruce said:


> I think we have a Seagate hater here. I wonder who he voted for?



Actually don't hate any more than any other. double 

In my spec I have a Seagate and a WD so raspberry


----------



## John Naylor (Apr 8, 2019)

1.  The type of drive should be based upon the usage ... you will find that there most often the difference between different drives as you describe is the firmware.   Firmware is tailored based upon the usage the main ones being Enterprise, Consumer, Enthusiast, Surveillance and NAS.  If you are a enthusiast consumer, buying an enterrpise drives means you can expect lower performance in your usage.   If going in a NAS, buy a NAS drive ... in a server, buy an enterprise drive ... in a security application, a surveillance drive.  If you are a enthusiast or gamer, a enthusiast / gaming drive will perform better for you than all other options.  Enterpise drives have frmware optimized for I/O.

2.  What to manufacturers do to provide their drives witha  5 year warranbted versus a 3 year warranty.  For the most part, other than the firmware, they just add a few bicks to the price to cover the extra warranty period ... no different than buying an extended warranty in the store for your toaster.

3.  If you want to evaluate reliability, use only data obtained from drive failure data when drives are used in accordance with manufacturer's instructions.  For example likes to use consumer drives on server applications.  As a "low budget server space provider" BB isn't all the attentive to manufacturer's instructions.  Server drives should be instaled in racks highly resistant to vibrations ... BB for example was found to be holding the consumer drives in server spaces place with rubberbands.  Consumer drives have a feature called "head parking" whereby the drive head is parked when not in use which prevents platter damage in instances of heavy vibration such as you might experience when your pet dog sleeping under your desk leaps up when the doorbell rings.  Drives might be rated say for 250-500k parking cycles, which oif used in a  server environment with extensive I/O could be used up in a matter of months.  Server drives do not come equipped with this feature so using an enterprise drive at home or on your office desk may mean no vibration protection.  If your looking at BB data for other than picking server drives for server environments you are essentially looking at a french english dictionary in the hopes of learning to speak chinese.

4.  Here's an actual data compilation which I had bookmarked showing RMA'd consumer drive failures in active use in a consumer environment for between 6 and 12 months.  the 1st number was the last 6 month reporting period and the number in parenthesis is the previous 6 month period.  As you can see all vendors are averaging 1% o less.

Seagate 0,72% (0,69%)
Toshiba 0,80% (1,15%)
Western 1,04% (1,03%)
HGST 1,13% (0,60%)
It's far more important to look at individual drives as every once and a while, everybody produces a crappy model.

3,48% Seagate Archive HDD 8 Tb
3,48% Hitachi Travelstar 5K1000 1 Tb
_3,42% Toshiba X300 5 Tb_
3,37% WD Red WD60EFRX 6 Tb
3,06% WD Red Pro WD4001FFSX 4 Tb
5.  It's worth noting that larger drives have a higher failure rate

Popular 2 TB drives ...

0,82% Seagate Barracuda 7200.14
0,77% Seagate Enterprise NAS HDD ST2000VN0001
0,56% Seagate NAS HDD ST2000VN000
*0,45% WD Black WD2003FZEX*
*0,43% Seagate Desktop SSHD ST2000DX001*
0,41% Seagate SpinPoint M9T ST2000LM00
6.  You may want to consider a SSHD is usage is enthusiast or gaming.  Looking at the 2 drives highlighted on bold above, the SSHD is 50% faster than the WD Black in gaming.  

The 2 TB SSHD is $99 and has a 5 year warranty
The 2 TB WD Black is $119 and has a 5 year warranty

In summary... your best bet from reliability AND performance is to pick a drive with firmware specifically tweaked for your intended usage.  If i remember correctly ....I am not up on the latest WE line up which IIRC is in transition.

Consumer Drives - Seagate Barracuda / WD Blue
Enthusiast Gaming Drives - Seagate Fire CUDA SSHD / WD Black
NAS Drives - Seagate Iron Wolf / WD Red
Surveillance Drives - Seagate Seahawk / WD Purple
Enterprise Performance Drives - Seagate Nytro
Enterprise Large Capacity Drives - Seagate Exos X
Enterprise Balanced Drives - Seagate Exos E


----------



## noobee (Jun 14, 2020)

Will I have any issues with Hitachi 4TB 512*n* HDD on win10?

speed, compatibility or any other issues...

Thank you!


----------



## noobee (Jun 27, 2020)

FordGT90Concept said:


> The Hitachis you have are likely 512n.  3+ TB is where 512n becomes inadequate.  I doubt 512n is available on drives larger than 4 TB because integrity information takes too much space on the platters.



hi Ford,

Why did you write that 512n will be inadequate in size 3+TB?

Do you mean inadequate speed?

I only have the opportunity to buy a 512n version (Hitachi 7k6000 4TB).

Thanks for your help.


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 29, 2020)

videobruce said:


> The drives models numbers are identical except for the last digit; 0 vs 1;



This indicates support for hardware drive encryption, probably not relevant to your use case.



noobee said:


> hi Ford,
> 
> Why did you write that 512n will be inadequate in size 3+TB?
> 
> ...



He meant they become more expensive to manufacture that way, that's all.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jun 29, 2020)

noobee said:


> Will I have any issues with Hitachi 4TB 512*n* HDD on win10?


No.

4Kn is the only thing you have to be careful of.  512n/512e is up to the manufacturer: what's exposed to the operating system is the same.


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 30, 2020)

FordGT90Concept said:


> 4Kn is the only thing you have to be careful of.



And even with it, just FYI, newer Win10 and Linux handle them fine.


----------

