1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Storage So much for buying only samsung f4's. Samsung now is the same as seagate..

Discussion in 'Hardware' started by GregTheRotter, 19 Jun 2012.

  1. faugusztin

    faugusztin I *am* the guy with two left hands

    11 Aug 2008
    Likes Received:
    SEAGATE Barracuda SpinPoint ST1000DM005. ROFL.
  2. DragunovHUN

    DragunovHUN Modder

    30 Oct 2008
    Likes Received:
    How'd you figure that? I'm not amazingly competent when it comes to identifying hard drives but these two seem to have the same firmware and the PCBs are identical aside from the brand of that ram chip, so i'm hoping it's at least technically the same thing.
  3. dark_avenger

    dark_avenger Minimodder

    9 Jul 2008
    Likes Received:
    All drives can and do fail. I've had about 20 drives RMA'd in the last ~6 years.
    Different manufacturers, different computers.

    Google did an internal study of the drives they had fail with some interesting results.
    The most likely time for a drive to fail is either very early in its life (less than 6 months old) and towards the end of it's life (3-4 years+)

    Certainly worth a read.

  4. Pookeyhead

    Pookeyhead It's big, and it's clever.

    30 Jan 2004
    Likes Received:
    This is backed up by my own experience. I've had drives fail within weeks of installation, and after several years, and never inbetween,

    I do have a problem with Seagate though. Every seagate drive I've had, and the two I still possess have large amounts of re-allocated sectors. I've even had brand new Seagate drives with re-allocated sectors. My Samsungs (old Samsungs) never had any, nor did my WDs.

    However... the early failures have ALL been WDs.

    You know what though? Who cares. Get a back up system with redundancy. You should have one anyway.
  5. Darkened

    Darkened What's a Dremel?

    28 Feb 2004
    Likes Received:
    If you're a photographer like Pookeyhead up there and myself, having several thousands or tens of thousands (maybe even more) RAW-files, I bet you'd think a bit differently.

    Besides my photos residing on my main computer, they also get backed up to my Linux server 1 (6x1Tb Raid-6) and once a month to my Linux server 2 (5x500Gb Raid-5). On top of that I have a timeline type continuous backup to an external drive & I make manually offsite backups to another external drive, which is stored in a safe.

    Depending on the camera a RAW-file goes from about 10Mb to about 80Mb for one image and these are DSLRs, so yes, a 80Mp digital back which produces about 500Mb images will eat up that space even faster.

    And no, I don't want to backup my images by printing them all out...
  6. Palhil

    Palhil What's a Dremel?

    22 Apr 2012
    Likes Received:
    Okay, so I'm thinking about getting the Western Digital Caviar Black WD1002FAEX 1TB. Obviously it's not the 2TB drive I was originally thinking off. But it seems to be quite fast and has a 5 year warranty. I have read some user reviews that say it's noisy. I'm not sure how noisy though. I'm not sure if that is just always a problem with 7200rpm drives.

    Any reasons why getting this drive is a bad idea?

Share This Page