# Can Seagate's Barracuda be trusted for data now a days?



## puma99dk| (Nov 13, 2019)

Personally I haven't touched Seagate disks for my personal data since all their issues with their Barracuda 7200.8 hdd's back in the days but now I am in a need of a cheap and reliable 7200rpm HDD with at least 64MB of cache since my WD  Enterprise 1TB may be dying slowly it got a causion warranty in CrystalDiskInfo and warranty expired 25th of September 2019 this is just ironic 

So I need a cheap and reliable hdd where I can offload the data so I am wondering what you people think about the Seagate Barracuda ST1000DM003 it's like £32,91 shipped to me.

I don't need more then 1TB for this data and I don't want to waste like £98 on a Samsung 860 QVO 1TB for this data.


----------



## biffzinker (Nov 13, 2019)

Toshiba is also a third option to consider as well if you would rather skip Seagate.






						Toshiba Performance X300 10TB SATA III HDD Review
					

It may cost slightly more compared to the competition but the Toshiba X300 10TB model more than makes up for that with its performance since simply put it’s the fastest overall 10TB HDD in our charts.




					www.nikktech.com
				












						Toshiba: Internal Storage
					

Toshiba internal hard drives



					www.amazon.co.uk


----------



## german199 (Nov 13, 2019)

Seagate never, I did that mistake 8 years ago and I will never do that again. (I lost 512GB)


----------



## puma99dk| (Nov 13, 2019)

I can source the Toshiba P300 Performance 1TB for about £35,30 at a eletronic local store.

Toshiba's model no: HDWD110EZSTA
Link: https://www.toshiba-storage.com/products/toshiba-internal-hard-drives-p300/


----------



## Jetster (Nov 13, 2019)

They had one batch of 2 Tb drives and 1 Tb about 8 years ago that were bad. The issue was fixed, they are no worse than any other drive. Just like all drives, if its important *Back it up*

I build a server using refurbished Seagate Constellation 6 x 3 Tb drives about 4 years ago for a friend and its still going
You might look for a deal on those. But drives are dirt cheap now

Another thing, never swear off a company because of a one bad experience. They all have them. If this were true i would never buy EVGA again. I've sent more EVGA parts back than anyone I know. And they make some of the best GPUs now


----------



## Nuckles56 (Nov 13, 2019)

I've had 0 problems with the 2TB barracuda that has been in my rig for 3 years now. Back things up and it doesn't matter what brand the drive is, as they all fail eventually.


----------



## biffzinker (Nov 13, 2019)

Jetster said:


> Another thing, never swear off a company because of a one bad experience.


I don't know about that, some people banned buying anything Samsung after 840 EVO fiasco.


----------



## Jetster (Nov 13, 2019)

biffzinker said:


> I don't know about that, some people banned buying anything Samsung after 840 EVO fiasco.



That a firmware update fixed? I don't know who these some people are

I get it. People do this, I'm just saying its not a good idea

Seagate drives are as good as any other. When they have issues, it gets fixed and there support is great. Back your stuff up
*seagate_surfer*


----------



## tabascosauz (Nov 13, 2019)

I've had one Seagate drive go bad, and it was a 5400rpm laptop drive that was on its second lease on life in a desktop. The only reason I preferred WD was for their streamlined and straightforward product stack, whereas literally everything Seagate is called Barracuda. OEM, retail, 5400rpm, 7200 rpm, got confusing after a while.

Blind brand loyalty (or aversion) is really almost never a good idea. Look how far it got the people who swore off Samsung after the 840EVO, missing out on one of the best SATA drives to this day (850EVO) and the fastest NVMes on the market. Only way is to find out for yourself by buying a Barracuda and seeing if it fits your needs.

Dare I say 7200rpm Barracudas have almost always been a little bit faster than WD Blues for me in the past.


----------



## biffzinker (Nov 13, 2019)

Jetster said:


> I get it. People do this, I'm just saying its not a good idea


Didn't stop me from buying a 970 EVO or a Samsung monitor, and a Note 9. Also had the 250 GB 850 EVO that I passed on to my brother.


----------



## 64K (Nov 13, 2019)

Lawyers


----------



## newtekie1 (Nov 13, 2019)

Yes, Seagate hard drives are fine.


----------



## R-T-B (Nov 13, 2019)

64K said:


> Lawyers



Potatoes.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 13, 2019)

In a word: yes.  If you're concerned about failure, RAID, and that applies to SSD and HDD alike.

That said, 1-4 TB drives have higher failure rates than drives sized above and below that.

Edit: Hmm...I'd do some digging to find a 1 platter version of like a 6 TB drive.  You get the better stability of the newer tech and you get better performance because of higher density.

Barracuda Pro 2 TB (ST2000DM009) is what I'd get in your described circumstance.  7 platters = 14 TB down to 1 platter = 2 TB.


----------



## puma99dk| (Nov 13, 2019)

FordGT90Concept said:


> In a word: yes.  If you're concerned about failure, RAID, and that applies to SSD and HDD alike.



Nope not really concerned about failure, I usually catch a drive before it fails and I don't know how I do it but I do in my own system   

I guess I will properly just collect the Toshiba directly after work tomorrow and thanks for the sharing of Seagate drives because a lot of ppl on youtube and so on uses Barracuda's and so on but I am not really sure.

I had one or two P300 at work going bad but that was in a server with a load of read and write in my own system it's just backup of a lot of old things I don't really use every day so it should last.


----------



## Devastator0 (Nov 13, 2019)

This is obviously my own personal experience but I have not had a problem with any Seagate Barracuda drives that I've ever purchased (the bulk have been 2TB's). I have read all of the reports about reliability problems and the like but in almost 20 years of building my own PC's and that, I've had nothing but good experiences with their HDD's.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 13, 2019)

I wouldn't buy the Toshiba because it's in that 1-4 TB class:





…ouch 120 pounds:





						Seagate BarraCuda 2 TB Internal Hard Drive HDD – 2.5 Inch SATA 6 Gb/s 5400 RPM 128 MB Cache for PC Laptop (ST2000LM015) - Seagate
					

Buy Seagate BarraCuda 2 TB Internal Hard Drive HDD – 2.5 Inch SATA 6 Gb/s 5400 RPM 128 MB Cache for PC Laptop (ST2000LM015) at Amazon.



					www.amazon.co.uk
				



If 40 pounds is all you want to spend then hopefully you get one that isn't a lemon.  I'd keep the old drive offline just in case.  If the new drives lasts over a year, it's fine.


----------



## mtcn77 (Nov 13, 2019)

Mine, 7200.11, started to head scratch the other day. Quickly recovered, though. I guess it depends whether you have been running it actively cooled or not, which I have being the single reason why it has held up for much longer than backblaze server joints that tar its image.


----------



## puma99dk| (Nov 13, 2019)

I don't want to buy 2TB I only need 1TB as a direct replacement.

If I didn't care about money I could just spend £98 locally for a Samsung 860 QVO 1TB but I care about my money and I don't want to use £98 for just a storage drive.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 13, 2019)

puma99dk| said:


> I don't want to buy 2TB I only need 1TB as a direct replacement.


It's new versus old.  The one I linked 2 TB/platter w/1 platter where the one you linked is 500 GB/platter w/ 2 platters. The reasons for wanting higher density is three fold:
1) faster: the more data moves under the head in a given time frame, the quicker it can do read/write operations.
2) lighter: 1 platter will weigh less than two platters.
3) reliability: there was something seriously wrong with the ~500 GB/platter models with an observed failure rate in the neighborhood of four times more frequent.  Granted, that's going from 1% to 4% but still, more is bad.

The fact it has twice the capacity is the result of technology moving on (1TB drives debuted what, a decade ago?).  1 TB models have been discontinued unless they're in 2.5" form factor.

In your shoes, knowing the cost difference is so huge, I would take my chances on the riskier drive too especially when the drive you have now hasn't completely failed.  That drive can still serve as a backup in case the new drive does fail.


----------



## NoJuan999 (Nov 14, 2019)

I bought a Seagate 2 TB (ST2000DM008) about 2 and 1/2 months ago and it performs very well so far.
It is almost twice as fast as my WD 1 TB Black and my WD 500 GB Blue HDDs.


----------



## outpt (Nov 14, 2019)

Had 1 seagate die on me after dropping it. Still have 3 with no problems.WD makes good hds


----------



## cucker tarlson (Nov 14, 2019)

biffzinker said:


> Toshiba is also a third option to consider as well if you would rather skip Seagate.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


that x300 is loud as hell
my p300 is too.and it's hot.not to mention spin up time takes bood 4-5 seconds while my seagate reacts almost instantly.


----------



## biffzinker (Nov 14, 2019)

cucker tarlson said:


> that x300 is loud as hell
> my p300 is too.and it's hot.not to mention spin up time takes bood 4-5 seconds while my seagate reacts almost instantly.


I wasn't suggesting the OP get that exact model other than Toshiba HDD might be worth looking at. I have a 5900RPM 3 TB in a external enclosure that hasn't caused any trouble for me.


----------



## hat (Nov 14, 2019)

Seagate can be trusted just about as much as any other major drive manufacturer, I reckon. That said, if you have important data, don't ever just buy <insert drive here> because it statistically has the lowest failure rates and call it a day. Use a backup. A RAID array can save you most of the time, but not if your computer explodes or burns down with the house. That's why they say RAID is NOT a backup! In my opinion, saying RAID is not a backup is going a bit far, but the point is valid. Especially important data should be backed up beyond a RAID array, just in case Zeus targets your computer with a rather hefty lightning bolt.


----------



## 64K (Nov 14, 2019)

Seagate probably has more failures simply because they sell a lot of drives:









						Backblaze Drive Stats: 2018 Hard Drive Failure Rates
					

Backblaze has 99,636 spinning hard drives. This review looks at the quarterly and lifetime statistics for the data drive models in operation in our data centers.




					www.backblaze.com


----------



## micropage7 (Nov 14, 2019)

i dunno, from my experience seagate it's pretty good, much better than WD
but now i'm considering WD since it's getting better in here
toshiba is nice but i've heard many got problem here, so i better choose between seagate and WD



64K said:


> Seagate probably has more failures simply because they sell a lot of drives:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


could be, don't forget how they or the shop send it to the customer could raise the risk of damaging the disk too


----------



## kapone32 (Nov 14, 2019)

Seagate drives are fine. It has been all I have used in the last 10 years in terms of HDD and SSHD and I have only had one (i dropped it) fail. All of the other drives are still viable.


----------



## seagate_surfer (Nov 15, 2019)

puma99dk| said:


> Personally I haven't touched Seagate disks for my personal data since all their issues with their Barracuda 7200.8 hdd's back in the days but now I am in a need of a cheap and reliable 7200rpm HDD with at least 64MB of cache since my WD  Enterprise 1TB may be dying slowly it got a causion warranty in CrystalDiskInfo and warranty expired 25th of September 2019 this is just ironic
> 
> So I need a cheap and reliable hdd where I can offload the data so I am wondering what you people think about the Seagate Barracuda ST1000DM003 it's like £32,91 shipped to me.
> 
> I don't need more then 1TB for this data and I don't want to waste like £98 on a Samsung 860 QVO 1TB for this data.



Hey puma99dk, just sharing some specs on that drive if you should go that route. If you need anything, just reach out. Great avatar BTW.


----------



## CrAsHnBuRnXp (Nov 15, 2019)

Nuckles56 said:


> I've had 0 problems with the 2TB barracuda that has been in my rig for 3 years now. Back things up and it doesn't matter what brand the drive is, as they all fail eventually.


Some just have a higher failure rate than others.






Personally for me, those numbers for Seagate are enough to keep me away.


----------



## puma99dk| (Nov 15, 2019)

seagate_surfer said:


> Hey puma99dk, just sharing some specs on that drive if you should go that route. If you need anything, just reach out. Great avatar BTW.



Hi @seagate_surfer 

Thanks it's for avatar comment I do love to be a bit punk in my adatude sometimes.

What is your thoughts about the EXOS 7E8 ST8000NM000A because I am thinking about 2 of these 2 replace my 2x4TB WD drives.

A little history from work is that In the past I experienced more Seagate hdd failures then other manufactures sadly even the EXOS series I had drive fail on under warranty even had a drive replaced that still again failed under warranty so I am still in the thinking stage because I won't like to go consumer with 2xST8000NM0055 to replace my 2xWD Red 4TB drives I purchased back in 2014 or something and are still running strong but thinking enterprice grade instead with Seagate EXOS drives.


----------



## seagate_surfer (Nov 15, 2019)

puma99dk| said:


> Hi @seagate_surfer
> 
> Thanks it's for avatar comment I do love to be a bit punk in my adatude sometimes.
> 
> ...



In your original post, you wanted an affordable drive of 1TB for backups; I imagine you are exploring other alternatives as well.  All drives will fail one day or another and I am sure we agree that backups are necessary no matter what the brand may be.  In this case the drive will do the job that you require but he final decision is yours as I do not want to impose what brand you need. As I tell everyone else, choose the right drive for the job and that is the best advice I can give. If you need more info, please reach out.


----------



## puma99dk| (Nov 15, 2019)

seagate_surfer said:


> In your original post, you wanted an affordable drive of 1TB for backups; I imagine you are exploring other alternatives as well.  All drives will fail one day or another and I am sure we agree that backups are necessary no matter what the brand may be.  In this case the drive will do the job that you require but he final decision is yours as I do not want to impose what brand you need. As I tell everyone else, choose the right drive for the job and that is the best advice I can give. If you need more info, please reach out.



For the larger drives with data I got I chose more carefully then the smaller once.

To be honest I don't want to pay the price on a HDD that is the same of a 1TB SATA drive because then I will automatically take the SSD any day


----------



## SKBARON (Nov 15, 2019)

I've been using a 4TB Seagate drive for the better part of 4 years now, and it wasn't new when I bought it. Zero performance or health issues. Second drive I use is a 2TB Hitachi, previously used in some kind of enterprise setting as it had high power-on hours but minimal power-on/off cycles. Zero performance or health issues on this one as well. 
Find a drive that works well for you in terms of performance and features and enjoy it. Hardware fails are pretty random and the best way to protect yourself is, as everyone else suggested, to have multiple backups on different storage media.
I will be swapping my 2 HDDs with one of bigger capacity and use these two for backups.


----------



## newtekie1 (Nov 15, 2019)

CrAsHnBuRnXp said:


> Personally for me, those numbers for Seagate are enough to keep me away.



I thought we were all pretty much on the same page that the Backblaze numbers were pretty much useless.


----------



## potato580+ (Nov 15, 2019)

pretty much can be yes, ive few 3.5 baracuda still rock solid after 8years or so, not sure about other model what so call evo bla bla bla tho, i dont pay for new product yet, still dont needed
edited: i only own single ssd for personal use, other than that old storage model


----------



## CrAsHnBuRnXp (Nov 15, 2019)

newtekie1 said:


> I thought we were all pretty much on the same page that the Backblaze numbers were pretty much useless.


News to me.


----------



## newtekie1 (Nov 16, 2019)

CrAsHnBuRnXp said:


> News to me.


Well now you know.


----------



## CrAsHnBuRnXp (Nov 16, 2019)

newtekie1 said:


> Well now you know.


Why though?


----------



## newtekie1 (Nov 16, 2019)

CrAsHnBuRnXp said:


> Why though?



Several reasons.  They use consumer drives in server environments.  The drives are subjected to stress they aren't designed for and wouldn't see in a normal desktop. What they consider failure wouldn't be a failure in a normal consumer use.  They consider a drive failed if it is marked failed from the RAID array.  But since they use drives that don't have TLER, RAID arrays often mark perfectly good drives as failed.  They completely throw out the numbers for drives that have 100% failure rates.  They've said in the past that they've had 100% failure rates with some WD models, and don't include them in their reported numbers.  I actually think I remember them saying this is why they don't even use WD drives anymore, because they were the most unreliable for their uses.  They had some models that worked great, but others that outright refused to work and had 100% failure rates.  That isn't to say WD drives are bad for consumer use, they just don't like to be put in RAID arrays.  At least the cheap ones don't.


----------



## micropage7 (Nov 16, 2019)

CrAsHnBuRnXp said:


> Some just have a higher failure rate than others.
> 
> View attachment 136571
> 
> Personally for me, those numbers for Seagate are enough to keep me away.


i dunno why in here i found many toshibas out when the cart shows toshiba looks good


----------



## John Naylor (Nov 16, 2019)

newtekie1 said:


> I thought we were all pretty much on the same page that the Backblaze numbers were pretty much useless.




The only people who should use Backblaze as a source of HD reliability information are folks that re going to intentionally install consumer hard drives in a an inadequately designed server environment in direct confict with manufacturers' written instructions and ignoring the fact that they are not designed for such usage.

You might as well complain about wearing a watch that was not designed to be waterproof when going diving to 200 feet of depth nd then complaining it failed.

When Backblaze published their data, some dude (Christopher Nelson) sued Seagate cause he had a drive fail and the warranty alsoi failed.  He sues on the bais of Backplaze data alleging that the data proved the drive was faulty.  It didn't turn pout so well:

1.  Backblaze installed consumer drives in a high-volume enterprise-class environment that far exceeded the warranty conditions of the HDDs.

2.  Backblaze used its own internally developed chassis, using rubber bands to hold the  vertically mounted HDDs in place.

3.  It is not as if testing consumer drives in a  server envirnment is like a tougher test and is therefore in any way representative of perforemnce in a consumer environment.  It does the opposite.     Putting a server drive in a  consumer environment makes it fail faster; putting consumer drive in a  server environment makes them fail faster. 

4.   Server drives are designed based upon the assumption that they will be installed in data centers with thick concrete floors and racks securely bolded to said floors providing a vibration free environment.  Server drives therefore do not include a head parking feature which parks the arm when I/O slacks to prevent the arm crashing into the disk when vibration occurs.   BB's rubberband equipped cases left sitting on folding table didn't exactly qualify for this designation.

5.  Most consumer drives are equipped with features suited to the consumer environment.  One of these is the head parking feature which is intended to protect the drive from the copy paper delivery guy's handruck at the office or your dog jumping up when doorbell rings while he's sleeping under your desk.  So here, the drive is parked when I/O activity lapses.

6.  Consumer drives don't see the I/O activity that server drives do so they spend most of their time in the parked position.  These drives are generally rated for 250-500k parking cycles, far more than they are likely do see in a small / medium office or home usage.

7.  Server drives on the other hand, can see  30-90k cycles in a month.  So the very feature that protects consumer drives in a consumer environment, causes pre-mature failure in a server environment.

8.  BB used more drives per chassis than allowed for under manufacturer's design specifications leading not only far greater loadings but also environment temperatures.

9.  BB took this route as low budget consumer drives made financial sense.   Not only were they much cheaper so that it was cheaper to replace a drive 3-4 times than purchase one designed for that environment, but server Hds were in short supply at the time because the flooding in Thailand has wiped out many plants.

10.  So what it comes down to is a)  of what possible relevance is backblaze data when they are purposely installing drives in direct conflict with manufacturermwritten instructions, inmtentionnaly ignoring the fact that they are not designed for this service and b)  why in the world would anyone look at this data when relevant data is readily available.  At the time that the BB data was used as the basis of this lawsuit, other data ..., actually applicable data ... was readily available and published by behardware.  The following data presents actual consumer drives bought by consumers thru retail channel(s) and  RMA'd by brand and model number.  The 1st number is the latest 6 month reporting date and the 2nd the 6 month reportimg period preceding:

Seagate 0,72% (0,69%)
Toshiba 0,80% (1,15%)
Western 1,04% (1,03%)
HGST 1,13% 0,60%)
To my eyes, based upon a historical perspective,  anything < 22% is great.  back in 2013 it was

Toshiba 1,15%
Seagate 1,44% (1,65%)
Western 1,55% (1,44%)
Samsung 2,24% (1,30%)
Hitachi 2,40% (3,45%)


----------



## StaticVapour (Nov 16, 2019)

I have never had problem with Seagate drives, i think brand does not matter as long as it's major manufacturer. Mechanical parts wear over time and there is nothing you can do about it


----------



## Kissamies (Nov 16, 2019)

Personally I prefer WD, but I wouldn't have a problem about getting a Seagate HDD for not-so-important use, like games.


----------



## biffzinker (Nov 16, 2019)

I forgot I do have one Seagate drive (ST1000DM003) from 2014 that's seems functional according to SMART. One annoyance I noticed was during writes it would start making a click sound then it would go away. I had it out of storage recently, the SMART values checked out other than the age of the drive. Wasn't making any click sounds this time though.

This drive:


			https://www.amazon.com/Seagate-Desktop-3-5-Inch-Internal-ST1000DM003/dp/B005T3GRNW/ref=pd_cp_147_1/139-4976831-8916265?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B005T3GRNW&pd_rd_r=775a412a-1fec-49b4-8804-c00ac8abee15&pd_rd_w=Qy8sh&pd_rd_wg=DBYdX&pf_rd_p=0e5324e1-c848-4872-bbd5-5be6baedf80e&pf_rd_r=ADAG9WV7FKZX068YEGEE&psc=1&refRID=ADAG9WV7FKZX068YEGEE


----------



## John Naylor (Nov 16, 2019)

StaticVapour said:


> I have never had problem with Seagate drives, i think brand does not matter as long as it's major manufacturer. Mechanical parts wear over time and there is nothing you can do about it



It is worth looking at the failure rates in individual drives ... some models have failure rates as high at 10%.  As you can see, Seagate has had the lowest failure rate for a large number of years ... but, it's not by a large margin.  Go over to storagereview.com ... they have a user reported database and in it, last time I looked anyway, Seagate has the drive with the lowest failure rate over its lifetime and also the drive with the highest failure rate over its lifetime.  Everyone produces a steallar drive and a real bomb every once and a while.

We haven't used a HD going on 9 years or so after switching to SSHDs.    The differenco in cost is minimal, the FireCuda is mor than 50% faster than the WD Black which costs significantly more, it has a lower failure rate and same 5 year warranty.  Boot time is 0.9 seconds behind the SSD in same box.

In that time ...

-No HDs have failed ... tho not unusual since the ones we have have been set aside for for site backups.
-No SSHDs have field which is surprising
-3 SSDs have failed, one a warranty replacement for one that had previously does.  All failures where mor thn 5 years ago in the early days when 120 GB was the norm


----------



## Mac2580 (Nov 18, 2019)

My Barracudas (2x80GB, 1x500GB and 1x 1TB) have all failed gracefully and ive been able to backup files after they started making clicking sounds. I have a Seagate Firecuda 2TB now where I keep my valuable files and savegames. I also own a WD Blue 2TB and photos are already getting corrupted although I have a feeling Win 10 is partially to blame.


----------



## ChristTheGreat (Nov 18, 2019)

Cheap and reliable, are not supposed to work together 

Seagate drive are okay, no problem, where WD has no cheap 7200rpm HDD, except old WD BLue.. All I can say, never trust any storage. IF data is important, copy it somewhere else


----------



## freeagent (Nov 18, 2019)

My brother had a seagate 1tb 3.5, he got a few years out of it. He upgraded his pc and gave me his, and that drive clicked as soon as I powered it up. I’ve only had a couple seagates and they both failed. But so did my wd raptors, and a wd black. I’m not sure it matters who you buy from.. go with the one with the best warranty. I wouldn’t buy seagate though, but that’s just an old prejudice I have. I had important stuff on that drive lol.


----------



## Hardcore Games (Nov 21, 2019)

last disks to die on me were a pair of 500GB units back when solders were changing. One was RMA and I got a 750GB which lasted more hours than the 500GB it replaced. That 750GB disk was the last one to die in the SATA disks. I did have failures with older EIDE disks and RLL/MFM disks. Modern disks are dramatically more reliable. Racking up 50,000 hours seems to be easy now.


----------



## WHOFOUNDFUNGUS (Nov 22, 2019)

Short answer: No. Then again, neither can Western Digital mechanical drives. Mechanical drives in general should not be trusted in the least bit. Always make drive images if you use them and preferably have the more critical data stored on SSDs and kept in cold storage. You might get away with forking out 4x the price for enterprise drives for a while but let's face it: They just don't make them like they used to. Manufacturers are desperately trying to keep peddling mechanical drives at a profit but they're losing the game so the quality just keeps on dropping. You asked. There it is.


----------



## John Naylor (Nov 22, 2019)

Failure rates on mechanical drives are about 1% ... that's the fact, that's the only fact that is relevant.  If ya model is under 1% ... be happy.

-    2,64% WD Green WD20EARX
-    2,15% Toshiba DT01ACA200
-    1,46% WD Green WD20EZRX
-    1,05% WD Red WD20EFRX
-    0,97% Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 ST2000DM001 

We don't use HDs, we use SSDs and SSHDs .... no failures in 5 years .... no SSHD faiures, 3 SSD failures in 8 years.


----------



## Jetster (Nov 22, 2019)

John Naylor said:


> Failure rates on mechanical drives are about 1% ... that's the fact, that's the only fact that is relevant.  If ya model is under 1% ... be happy.
> 
> -    2,64% WD Green WD20EARX
> -    2,15% Toshiba DT01ACA200
> ...



True, but when you post something like that its helpful to link the references or study.  Otherwise its not a fact
But i concur, all manufactures are really close and very have reliable drive.


----------



## WHOFOUNDFUNGUS (Nov 22, 2019)

How many Seagate Barracuda hard drives I've had fail on me out of the box within the first week of receiving them in the past five years is more than I would care to venture to guess. Certainly more than 1%. Maybe 40%? (I'm being optimistic.) I'm thinking it might have something to do with location, elevation, rough shipping and handling, or just climate. clickety, clickety, click ooops there goes SMART again!


----------



## R-T-B (Nov 22, 2019)

WHOFOUNDFUNGUS said:


> How many Seagate Barracuda hard drives I've had fail on me out of the box within the first week of receiving them in the past five years is more than I would care to venture to guess. Certainly more than 1%. Maybe 40%? (I'm being optimistic.) I'm thinking it might have something to do with location, elevation, rough shipping and handling, or just climate. clickety, clickety, click ooops there goes SMART again!



There was a rumor going around that their plant in China (now closed) was really, really bad at one point.  

Maybe you kept getting China-manufactured regional drives?

No idea if that rumor was even true frankly, but if it was, it certainly isn't an issue now.  The plant closed last year or something.


----------

