Reliability of Seagate drives of 2012

Silencing hard drives, optical drives and other storage devices

Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee

Post Reply
bozar
Posts: 305
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 10:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Reliability of Seagate drives of 2012

Post by bozar » Sat Mar 24, 2012 8:37 am

My Barracuda LP just crashed after a little more than 2 years of life. Always been disturbed by the strange noise it caused, even suspended. My system-HDD, a 7200.12 500 GB is what concerns me a lot, while it doesn't make the same amount of noise it still shows the same patterns while running a diagnostic too. Am I to be worried about this drive or will it last until the time I decide SSDs are cheap enough?

Abula
Posts: 3613
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 12:22 pm
Location: Guatemala

Re: Reliability of Seagate drives of 2012

Post by Abula » Sat Mar 24, 2012 8:47 am

Its extrely hard to predict hard drive failures, there is relly no way of knowing, ihave old ide drives that click and make noises, and still work after 10 years, while new silent very quiet hdds have faile me in less than a month.

My suggestion is, if you still fin ssd too expensive, or not enough stotage for your needs, then backup your hdd into another mechanical hdd, imo mehcanical hdds still have a use, storage, and will continue to do so for years to come, ssds are furfilling an elite sector atm and will transition in time to replace them, but this will take years.

I expect ssds to reach close to $1 per gb before years end but I don't think we will see them go into mechanical prices for maybe 5 years.
GameMi - Intel i9 9900K + Gigabyte Z390 AM + Asus RTX2080Ti Strix | MiniMi - Intel i7 8700K + ASRock Z370ITX + MSI RTX2080Ti
StreaMi - Intel i9 7940X + AsRock X299 Taichi + Asus GTX1080Ti Strix | WorkMi - AMD 1950X + AsRock X399 Taichi + MSI GTX1080
ServeMi - Intel Xeon E3-1230 + Supermicro X9SCM-F + 144TB | StoreMi - Intel Xeon E3 1240v5 + Supermicro X11SSM-F + 42TB | CamMi - Intel i7 4770K + MSI H81i + Blue Iris

ces
Posts: 3395
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 6:06 pm
Location: US

Re: Reliability of Seagate drives of 2012

Post by ces » Sat Mar 24, 2012 10:06 am

bozar wrote:My Barracuda LP just crashed after a little more than 2 years of life. Always been disturbed by the strange noise it caused, even suspended. My system-HDD, a 7200.12 500 GB is what concerns me a lot, while it doesn't make the same amount of noise it still shows the same patterns while running a diagnostic too. Am I to be worried about this drive or will it last until the time I decide SSDs are cheap enough?
For what it is worth, here is some reliability data:
viewtopic.php?p=555937#p555937
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
"Aristotle calls man the rational animal. All my life I have been seeking evidence to confirm this" Bertrand Russell
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former" Albert Einstein

bozar
Posts: 305
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 10:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Reliability of Seagate drives of 2012

Post by bozar » Sat Mar 24, 2012 12:19 pm

ces wrote:For what it is worth, here is some reliability data:
viewtopic.php?p=555937#p555937
Thanks, just what I needed. My Barracuda LP seems to have a higher rate of failure compared to many other drives but the 7200.12 are more stable according to those reviews.

mkk
Posts: 687
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2004 1:51 pm
Location: Gefle, Sweden
Contact:

Re: Reliability of Seagate drives of 2012

Post by mkk » Sat Mar 24, 2012 1:41 pm

Never trust any single drive. Treat them all as unreliable and you'll get a more realistic outlook. :)

ces
Posts: 3395
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 6:06 pm
Location: US

Re: Reliability of Seagate drives of 2012

Post by ces » Sat Mar 24, 2012 4:47 pm

mkk wrote:Never trust any single drive. Treat them all as unreliable and you'll get a more realistic outlook. :)
Agreed
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
"Aristotle calls man the rational animal. All my life I have been seeking evidence to confirm this" Bertrand Russell
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former" Albert Einstein

xan_user
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 2269
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 9:09 am
Location: Northern California.

Re: Reliability of Seagate drives of 2012

Post by xan_user » Fri Jul 06, 2012 10:14 am

mkk wrote:Never trust any single drive. Treat them all as unreliable and you'll get a more realistic outlook. :)
I go by this axiom; "data doesn't really exist, if its only stored in one place." (and data barely exists if its only in two locations... :P )
Help SPCR keep the lights on, use these links when you buy: NCIX, Amazon and Newegg

m0002a
Posts: 2831
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 2:12 am
Location: USA

Re: Reliability of Seagate drives of 2012

Post by m0002a » Fri Jul 06, 2012 2:24 pm

bozar wrote:My Barracuda LP just crashed after a little more than 2 years of life. Always been disturbed by the strange noise it caused, even suspended. My system-HDD, a 7200.12 500 GB is what concerns me a lot, while it doesn't make the same amount of noise it still shows the same patterns while running a diagnostic too. Am I to be worried about this drive or will it last until the time I decide SSDs are cheap enough?
Hard Drive manufacturing engineers have pretty consistently stated that suspending a drive is not good for drive reliability, and technically they do not provide a warranty for such installations (although obviously you aren't going to tell them that it was suspended if you did return a defective drive under warranty). I don't know if this has been proven, but if a drive already makes a lot of noise or vibrates much while suspended, it does seem logical to me that suspending a drive could exacerbate reliability problems. There a quite a few threads on this subject from years ago on this forum.

Another factor in reliability is drive speed. It is easier to make a more reliable drive if it runs at a slower speed. Also, a quieter drive (not coincidently these are usually the ones that run slower) may be more reliable because there is less friction in the bearings, etc. The build date is also important, since drive technology (including low friction bearings) are better now than they were 5 years ago (and light years ahead of 10 years ago when most drives vibrated more than a "personal" massage device).

Regarding the reliability data posted above, those statistics are not reliable (no pun intended), since it is based on return rates, not necessarily long term failure rates. Some drives may be more likely to be returned for reasons other than drive failure, and besides, those numbers are likely dominated by DOA (dead on arrival) samples (or drives damaged during installation) rather than returns based drive failure after some period of use.

Personally, I use combination of SSD and WD green drives (1-2 TB). The WD Green drives are securely mounted with the silicone grommets that come with Antec drive trays, and I can't hear the drives, so there doesn't seem to be much benefit of suspending drives anymore (unlike the old days when I first joined SPCR). File caching improvement in Windows 7 has significantly reduced the need for fast seek times IMO, assuming one has sufficient memory. Obviously, there are some applications where drive speed is important, including for commercial databases, but they all use RAID configurations with hot swap spares, regular backups, etc.

Post Reply