6 TB not enough for you? Seagate now has a 8 TB drive in the works - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Amez;45821544]No idea why people even consider Seagate a reputable hard drive manufacturer. Their desktop drives are absolute shit. Oddly enough there can be some gold found in that mound of shit because I admit I have an old 1TB Seagate drive that is still operational after ~4 years. Back in the day I used to think Hitachi was crap because their drives were often noisy but it turned out that even though they sounded bad they would never actually break down. Western Digital is the perfect mid-ground because their desktop drives last a long time and are generally quiet. Their WD Blue line is by far the best at least for longevity but their Black series drives are obviously geared towards performance. I've had many Black series drives fail me but every Blue I have bought are still functioning just fine. Blue is perfect for storing data and using it for gaming, I don't find that much of a difference in load times compared to a Black series drive. I just wish they would offer a larger size than a measly 1TB. 2TB is the perfect size for a drive. It's not too big so in the event of a failure you won't lose everything in the world to you like this 8TB drive.[/QUOTE] I have 4 seagate drives and the oldest has been in here since 2007. No problems at all I also have a Rosewill 750W PSU with a ridiculously high failure rate that's been in here since 2007. I think I used up all my luck on this machine

[QUOTE=wickedplayer494;45821087]Yep: [t]https://www.backblaze.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/blog-fail-drives-manufacture.jpg[/t] (sauce: [url]https://www.backblaze.com/blog/what-hard-drive-should-i-buy/[/url])[/QUOTE] nah this is a load of shit [url]http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/6028/dispelling-backblaze-s-hdd-reliability-myth-the-real-story-covered/[/url]

[QUOTE=Egon Spengler;45821044]Going to remain rather optimistic about this since iirc Seagate still has the highest failure rates when it comes to HDDs. This is still pretty amazing though.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=meppers;45821047]but since it's made by seagate it'll just die in 6 months[/QUOTE] I haven't had much issue with Seagate drives myself. I've had one fail on me and I got that one in 2008 and it only died last year. A lot of that time it was my only drive and I left my computer on 24/7 at the time as well. I'm currently using a 2TB Seagate I've had a couple of years and a 4TB I've had for about a year (the failed one was a 1TB) and neither of those have had any issues either.

Does anyone else name their hard drives, I name mine after portal cubes. [img]http://i.imgur.com/RWXw1Lh.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=Shadaez;45821650]nah this is a load of shit [url]http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/6028/dispelling-backblaze-s-hdd-reliability-myth-the-real-story-covered/[/url][/QUOTE] Glad to see I'm not the only one that realizes that it was a load of BS.

[QUOTE=Metallica;45821774]Does anyone else name their hard drives, I name mine after portal cubes. [img]http://i.imgur.com/RWXw1Lh.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] My favorite cube was always the System Reserved cube.

and im sitting here with my 512 gb hdd

It's gonna be weird in like ten years when this isn't much.

[QUOTE=thrawn2787;45821303]Or you could just use said extra drives with [B]automated back ups (ie RAID1)[/B]. But if you do that, say using 2 as main drives and [B]2 as backups[/B], then with the 2 TBs you're left with 4 TB total. If you used 8 TB drives you'd have you're original 16 TB. [/QUOTE] Raid is never a backup. It's for uptime. Please don't tell people this. [editline]28th August 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=matt000024;45821979]It's gonna be weird in like ten years when this isn't much.[/QUOTE] If we don't change out current drive systems, we won't be increasing drive sizes much. We're already hitting much of the limit of what current magnetic drives can do, even with vertical tech. We'll need to move to something different.

[QUOTE=Brt5470;45821984]If we don't change out current drive systems, we won't be increasing drive sizes much. We're already hitting much of the limit of what current magnetic drives can do, even with vertical tech. We'll need to move to something different.[/QUOTE] We'll convert to gigaquads and holodecks.

[QUOTE=Metallica;45821774]Does anyone else name their hard drives, I name mine after portal cubes. [img]http://i.imgur.com/RWXw1Lh.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] I have a leftover 20gb partition called '1984 Denver Broncos' . The others are just 'Steam', 'Installs', 'Data', and 'C'

My seagate has yet to display any failure... although I accidentally got the 2TB version meant to be used on a network so I have it hooked into my ethernet port after a bad incident involving fraps footage and having this on my home network downstairs.

[QUOTE=Shadaez;45821650]nah this is a load of shit [URL]http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/6028/dispelling-backblaze-s-hdd-reliability-myth-the-real-story-covered/[/URL][/QUOTE] I was gonna post this. Are people actually stupid enough to believe 14% and 10% failure rates??!

[QUOTE=aydin690;45822050]I was gonna post this. Are people actually stupid enough to believe 14% and 10% failure rates??![/QUOTE] I personally had no idea the data was false, I've heard of false data before when it came to reviews etc for certain PC parts etc but I never encountered one myself Atleast I know now.

[QUOTE=Brt5470;45821984]If we don't change out current drive systems, we won't be increasing drive sizes much. We're already hitting much of the limit of what current magnetic drives can do, even with vertical tech. We'll need to move to something different.[/QUOTE] If we do ever hit a limit we can't pass and people start "renting" space from mass storage facilities it will be a sad day.

[QUOTE=bdd458;45821251] I got a 4tb instead of a 3tb and it works fine. Unless your doing heavy level shit with your Seagate drives you'll be fine.[/QUOTE] After they fucked up with the 7200.11 line's firmware, I was officially done with Seagate. I've had a really nice experience with all my WD drives (all 6 of them) the only exception being my latest one, which has a really high current pending sector count. [t]http://s.gvid.me/s/2014/08/27/1409201681-7M.png[/t] But all my others (3 RE4 1TB, 605 days uptime) are perfect. Even my old WD Caviar black 1TB with 3 years on it is working without a hitch. The only plus I've seen to a Seagate (other than it's marginally cheaper) is they seem to handle being involved in car crashes fairly well.

[QUOTE=meppers;45821047]but since it's made by seagate it'll just die in 6 months[/QUOTE] Reallly.? I've been using my seagate for the past 6 years, and it's been a-okay!

[QUOTE=glitchvid;45822129]After they fucked up with the 7200.11 line's firmware, I was officially done with Seagate. I've had a really nice experience with all my WD drives (all 6 of them) the only exception being my latest one, which has a really high current pending sector count. [t]http://s.gvid.me/s/2014/08/27/1409201681-7M.png[/t] But all my others (3 RE4 1TB, 605 days uptime) are perfect. Even my old WD Caviar black 1TB with 3 years on it is working without a hitch. The only plus I've seen to a Seagate (other than it's marginally cheaper) is they seem to handle being involved in car crashes fairly well.[/QUOTE] I own 8 Seagate drives, 6x 3TB and 2x2TB all are currently running right now and a single WD 1TB external. None have completely failed, one had some sketchy SMART and went and got it replaced. All of the 3TB's are 7200.14's and are super fucking quiet but also push insane bandwidth. 170-180MB/s I would totally recommend them if you get the ones with 2yr warranties, anything less is likely from the chinese district and will definitely break. With that said, when I eventually buy a new set of drives for a new set of recording RAID1's, I will go with RED likely.

[QUOTE=Dr.C;45821008]I know you're just joking but this is actually a problem for me [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/uoScooo.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] At least you have some breathing room [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/vwEvQ00.png[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Metallica;45821774]Does anyone else name their hard drives, I name mine after portal cubes. [img]http://i.imgur.com/RWXw1Lh.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] [img]http://i.imgur.com/lrqCM8q.png8[/img] D:

[QUOTE=Brt5470;45821984]Raid is never a backup. It's for uptime. Please don't tell people this. [editline]28th August 2014[/editline] If we don't change out current drive systems, we won't be increasing drive sizes much. We're already hitting much of the limit of what current magnetic drives can do, even with vertical tech. We'll need to move to something different.[/QUOTE] Memristors, please.

who even needs that kind of hdd isn't it better to have many of small amounts, if one dies you're not losing all also, worst idea ever (ssd) [img]http://i.cubeupload.com/UcTieI.png[/img]

I'd love to have that much space although provided that they actaully test the drive to see how it lasts over the years.

[QUOTE=Brt5470;45822181]None have completely failed, one had some sketchy SMART and went and got it replaced. All of the 3TB's are 7200.14's and are super fucking quiet but also push insane bandwidth. 170-180MB/s I would totally recommend them if you get the ones with 2yr warranties, anything less is likely from the chinese district and will definitely break. With that said, when I eventually buy a new set of drives for a new set of recording RAID1's, I will go with RED likely.[/QUOTE] Hmm, that is pretty fast, I'll have to look into them, but right now I don't have any more available drive bays, nor another jbod or raid card to attach them to; so I'll have to wait for one of my drives to fail. The current WD drives I'm buying are usually the RE4s, so they have 5 years warranties, which is one of the main reasons I get them (that and their insane "spec" lifetime). It seems WD is starting to phase out the 1TB models though, since their 2tb+ models are getting a lot of the new features and builds. I do have a single RED, it's nice but I never needed it in a NAS environment so I can't attest to that. On that note, I'm concerned about the newer RE that I put in for my OS; I can easily see it failing because it's pending sector count(FastTrack threw it at my door from the curb when it arrived, so I suspected it might have taken some damage) and having a ton of pain; so I'm probably going to image it to my red.

the bigger the drive the easier it seems to fill up with crap

One of these and I would still manage to run out quickly [t]http://goo.gl/TnLiki[/t] But yeah, I would rather get a couple of 2 or 3TB drives instead of one huge one, as if one of them starts to fail, I can easily back it up to another. And knowing seagate (The only drive I've ever had fail on me), it would not take long for that to happen.

[QUOTE=Ehmmett;45821535]I'd rather see increases in speed and lifespan rather than size. I've already got more space than I know what to do with and I only have 6TB across a few drives.[/QUOTE] Higher capacity means higher density, which basically means faster transfer rates. I'm pretty sure the limiting factors with HDDs are density and how fast you can get the thing to turn. The controller's probably important as well, but I don't think it's the bottleneck.

Was digging around and found an old 20Gb IDE Hdd from about 15 years ago, that was good back in the day and now we have 300x that amount of storage. Seems crazy to me tbh

[QUOTE=Metallica;45821774]Does anyone else name their hard drives, I name mine after portal cubes. [img]http://i.imgur.com/RWXw1Lh.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] I had mine named after the 4 members of Led Zeppelin until my 500gig died [editline]28th August 2014[/editline] that wasn't even supposed to be a joke oh dear

I could fill up like 3 TB, not sure about 8. [editline]28th August 2014[/editline] Then again if I had 8 TB I'd probably get the highest quality of everything.