Decrease my amount of HDD's...help please!

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jctess87

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 28, 2011
Messages
420
I have the following HDD's:
1x 750gb C drive
1x 750gb D drive
1x 1.5TB E drive
1X 2TB G drive
1x 1TB external K drive

These all total out to almost 5.5 TB of formatted storage space. However, as you can see that is a ton of HDD's, and I'm sure the heat those things generate doesn't help anything. So this is where I need your help [H], I would like to decrease the amount of HDD's in my case and use 15k rpm for my C: drive as well. Should I just buy another 2TB HDD to replace the 2x 750GB's or find a 3TB and replace both of the 750's and the 1.5TB and buy a 15k rpm for C

Also, I'm unsure of how SAS works, do you have to get a converter for SATA or what exactly?
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't quite say 5 drives is considered 'a ton of HDDs' There's nothing special about this, just math. You have 5.5TB currently, so replace them with 2 3TB or 2 TB drives. Problem solved.

For only that many drives, I wouldn't even bother with SAS. Your motherboard controller should be fine for that. No need to add additional equipment (SAS Card) and expense to a simple solution.

As for heat, if you're planning to move to 15k rpm drives, I'm betting those would be hotter then what you're currently using. Even with less drives at 15k would probably add more heat then what you're currently using. I would just get a SSD for your C: and a pair of 2 or 3TB Green drives for everything else. You already have a 2TB in that list, so I'm assuming you plan on keeping them. I don't think a 2TB or even a 1.5TB upgrade would be the best bang for your bucks.
 
jctess87 said:
Also, I'm unsure of how SAS works, do you have to get a converter for SATA or what exactly?
Click to expand...

No SAS cards handle SAS or SATA directly. They use the same cable end at the drive although the controller end is different with SAS.

I wouldn't quite say 5 drives is considered 'a ton of HDDs' There's nothing special about this, just math. You have 5.5TB currently, so replace them with 2 3TB or 2 TB drives. Problem solved.
Click to expand...

It would most likely be cheaper for 3 x 2TB than 2 x 3TB at this time. 2TB drives can be had for less than $80 US while the cheapest 3TB will be almost double that.
 
Zerosum said:
I wouldn't quite say 5 drives is considered 'a ton of HDDs' There's nothing special about this, just math. You have 5.5TB currently, so replace them with 2 3TB or 2 TB drives. Problem solved.

For only that many drives, I wouldn't even bother with SAS. Your motherboard controller should be fine for that. No need to add additional equipment (SAS Card) and expense to a simple solution.

As for heat, if you're planning to move to 15k rpm drives, I'm betting those would be hotter then what you're currently using. Even with less drives at 15k would probably add more heat then what you're currently using. I would just get a SSD for your C: and a pair of 2 or 3TB Green drives for everything else. You already have a 2TB in that list, so I'm assuming you plan on keeping them. I don't think a 2TB or even a 1.5TB upgrade would be the best bang for your bucks.
Click to expand...

I didn't say that it was anything special, just that it is a lot of drives (to me) and I'd like to have less in my case. Also I'm not planning on moving to all 15k HDD's just using one for my C drive. I guess I'll just get another 2TB HDD for now to replace the 2x 750GB's or be on the lookout for a decently priced 3TB to replace the 2x 750GB's and the 1.5TB hdd and find a relatively cheap 15k HDD for the C drive what size drive is recommended for the C drive these days?
 
A 15k SAS drive seems odd in the SSD age, especially if you are so concerned with heat. Why not an SSD for your C: drive? They are cool and use less power.

See my sig for green/low power drives for storage.
 
[LYL]Homer;1037116685 said:
A 15k SAS drive seems odd in the SSD age, especially if you are so concerned with heat. Why not an SSD for your C: drive? They are cool and use less power.

See my sig for green/low power drives for storage.
Click to expand...

serbiaNem said:
There's a deal for a Hitachi 3TB for 110 at Microcenter. Seems the best bet.

Get SSD for main. 15k drives are fading.

http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1600833
Click to expand...

Pardon me if this is a stupid question, but don't SSD's get very fragmented as they are not able to get defragmented and this causes them to run slowly over time? I think I read that in a thread on here somewhere actually. I think someone else said later in the thread that they could be defragmented but it is bad for them as it causes them to wear down more quickly or something, how long do those things usually last? With the not being able to defragmented, and/or them wearing down quickly is what has made me scared of considering one of those for a C drive. However I'm not sure if those are true or not so perhaps some of you could clear that up for me. Is moving to two or so 3TB drives for my storage drives the best option do you all think, price isn't really a great issue to be honest. Thanks.
 
and/or them wearing down quickly is what has made me scared of considering one of those for a C drive.
Click to expand...

No they do not wear down quickly. An Intel SSD used in a desktop computer is expected to last at least as long as a regular hard drive probably longer. They used to guarantee that you can write 20GB a day every single day for 5 consecutive years. I believe their current models extend this even further.

I can tell you that the OS 80 GB Intel SSD I purchased in 2009 tells me that I have 98% live left in the drive.

but don't SSD's get very fragmented as they are not able to get defragmented and this causes them to run slowly over time?
Click to expand...

TRIM, Secure Erase and the firmware of the SSD itself work to prevent this. And even in this slower state they are still 10 times as fast as a 15K harddrive at small reads and writes (which are the operations that happen most).
 
drescherjm said:
No they do not wear down quickly. An Intel SSD used in a desktop computer is expected to last at least as long as a regular hard drive probably longer.



TRIM, Secure Erase and the firmware of the SSD itself work to prevent this. And even in this slower state they are still 10 times as fast as a 15K harddrive at small reads and writes (which are the operations that happen most).
Click to expand...

Okay, well I guess I'll be getting a SSD for my C, do you recommend the Intel branded ones? Or which is best? What size is best for C 120, 160? Do you think the 2x 3TB drives would be the best choice for my other HDD's?
 
Okay, well I guess I'll be getting a SSD for my C, do you recommend the Intel branded ones?
Click to expand...

I do for reliability and overall performance. Intel drives are not the fastest but they are very reliable and do not loose performance as much as other brands.

This is kind of a bad time to purchase SSDs because prices have jumped up recently. On black Friday last year I ended up paying $169 (with $32 rebate card) for my G2 120 GB SSD and it came with a free game.. Now I am seeing the G3 at over $300 for the same size..


Do you think the 2x 3TB drives would be the best choice for my other HDD's?
Click to expand...

I recommend 3x 2TB since 2TB drives are much cheaper per GB.
 
drescherjm said:
I do for reliability and overall performance. Intel drives are not the fastest but they are very reliable and do not loose performance as much as other brands.
Click to expand...

I would amend that slightly, Intel drives are nearly as fast as their peers and have great overall performance but don't peak quite as high in some benchmarks. In any case, the difference between the G2 and G3 drives isn't super huge (at least in terms of real world use), especially for someone coming from spinning disks.

Check out the Intel 320 series if you only have SATA2 and/or are tighter on the budget (though they will work fine on SATA3), or the 510 series if you have SATA3 and want top performance (and these will work on SATA2 with lower performance).
 
drescherjm said:
I do for reliability and overall performance. Intel drives are not the fastest but they are very reliable and do not loose performance as much as other brands.

This is kind of a bad time to purchase SSDs because prices have jumped up recently. On black Friday last year I ended up paying $169 (with $32 rebate card) for my G2 120 GB SSD and it came with a free game.. Now I am seeing the G3 at over $300 for the same size..




I recommend 3x 2TB since 2TB drives are much cheaper per GB.
Click to expand...

I'm just going to get 2x 3TB as price isn't really an issue, what brand has the best reliability and performance? Also I see Intel is the way to go for the SSD and 120GB should be fine?
 
120 GB should be fine for windows 7 + quite a few applications. If you are a big gamer you may need more if you want to keep all applications on the SSD so the answer to that question depends on your usage.
 
I'm not a huge gamer, however I do play a few games as new ones come out and everything. I may just go for a 240GB or so just to be sure though. Intel still the bees-knee's for a 240gb, which one specifically is recommended (what model) for decent performance that isn't outrageously priced?
 
I'm just going to get 2x 3TB as price isn't really an issue, what brand has the best reliability and performance?
Click to expand...

I recommend hitachi drives at the moment.

As far as prices and SSD models I will let others answer that now. I am too busy at the day job trying to solve a viewing problem with Lung CT.
 
drescherjm said:
I recommend hitachi drives at the moment.

As far as prices and SSD models I will let others answer that now. I am too busy at the day job trying to solve a viewing problem with Lung CT.
Click to expand...

Word, that's more important but thanks for the recommendation.

Edit: Wait aren't deathstars shitty?
 
Edit: Wait aren't deathstars shitty?
Click to expand...

hitachi has turned things around from the problems that IBM had with their disks.

At work where I have purchased from every manufacturer over the last 15 years I have had bad batches from just about all manufacturers..
 
On newegg, the 3tb deathstars seem to have some bad ratings still I just checked when I edited that
 
My second recommendation is WDC Green. I would normally recommend Samsung but I am not sure that they have a 3TB yet.

3TB drives have been out for a few months.
 
[LYL]Homer;1037116685 said:
A 15k SAS drive seems odd in the SSD age, especially if you are so concerned with heat. Why not an SSD for your C: drive? They are cool and use less power.

See my sig for green/low power drives for storage.
Click to expand...
SAS drives are still cheaper (if you're thinking of dollars per gigabyte of storage). I see no reason to be concerned about heat; the OP says he's "sure it can't be helping anything", but I don't know what makes him sure he's generating much heat, and that the heat is harming anything. It's not clear what his real goal might be.
 
A 15K SAS drive would be cheaper per GB and may or may not be more reliable than a SSD for desktop usage. However it would be significantly slower than pretty much any current generation SSD at normal desktop loads that are dominated by small reads and writes.
 
"Normal desktop loads" are a bit vague, but if we assume nothing special, then I'd tend to agree. But jctess87 hasn't given us enough context about his intended usage to provide him any meaningful advice.

Seems like he's been buying more drives in order to get more storage, not faster storage, though. If that's true, it would seem that SSDs are excluded.
 
I'm mostly just looking for more space, less HDD's, and a fast boot drive. I'm unsure if a 15k or SSD is a better choice for the boot drive though that's why I've come to you all for advice. I'm going with 2x 3tb now it seems, I just need to know which brand is best ((besides deathstars) it looks like WD possibly?)), and which SSD exactly to go with now, or if I should get a 15k instead?
 
You're asking which interface is "better" or which brand is "best", but giving no constraints about your budget, your application, your goals, or your needs. This is like asking how long a piece of string should be, and if you should use string or rope instead. (Amazingly, people will still chime in with answers. "We use 30-foot strings at work and would never go back!" or "Hitachi strings suck ass, you should never buy them", or "There are some reviews of Samsung rope on Newegg and some of those reviews aren't favorable.")

If you want to just chat, that's great. If you want a meaningful answer, you'll need to tell us more about what your goals are.

An SSD will boot fastest, but per gigabyte its the most expensive. If you can live with paying so much and managing your files carefully so that only the OS and no data or programs are installed, you can fit on a smaller drive. (Or, spend a bunch more and put the OS and some programs on it, but still no data.)

A 15KRPM SAS drive would be faster for booting than a consumer SATA drive, but not as fast as the SSD. It's more realistic to put SAS drives in RAID, since you don't have to worry about TRIM support, so RAID1 becomes an option. These drives are expensive, but you get plenty of capacity for about the same price as an SSD and might not have to be so concerned with splitting programs from data.

A SATA drive won't be as fast for booting, but you can have plenty of space and not worry as much about which programs land where.

Where you want to land on the space-to-convenience and price-to-performance curves is a question only you can answer.
 
mikeblas said:
You're asking which interface is "better" or which brand is "best", but giving no constraints about your budget, your application, your goals, or your needs. This is like asking how long a piece of string should be, and if you should use string or rope instead. (Amazingly, people will still chime in with answers. "We use 30-foot strings at work and would never go back!" or "Hitachi strings suck ass, you should never buy them", or "There are some reviews of Samsung rope on Newegg and some of those reviews aren't favorable.")

If you want to just chat, that's great. If you want a meaningful answer, you'll need to tell us more about what your goals are.

An SSD will boot fastest, but per gigabyte its the most expensive. If you can live with paying so much and managing your files carefully so that only the OS and no data or programs are installed, you can fit on a smaller drive. (Or, spend a bunch more and put the OS and some programs on it, but still no data.)

A 15KRPM SAS drive would be faster for booting than a consumer SATA drive, but not as fast as the SSD. It's more realistic to put SAS drives in RAID, since you don't have to worry about TRIM support, so RAID1 becomes an option. These drives are expensive, but you get plenty of capacity for about the same price as an SSD and might not have to be so concerned with splitting programs from data.

A SATA drive won't be as fast for booting, but you can have plenty of space and not worry as much about which programs land where.

Where you want to land on the space-to-convenience and price-to-performance curves is a question only you can answer.
Click to expand...

I have a budget of I'd say around $500 total right now. However after I get a few large capacity HDD's to move all of my junk to I can sell all of my other HDD's so more like around $700-750 total. I guess I've decided to go with the SSD and a few 3TB HDD's for now I just need to know what brand and model of SSD to go with now, and what brand and model of 3TB HDD's to go with now.
 
People have said already. Intel SSD and Hitachi HDD. Intel seem to make the most reliable SSD's. Hitachi HDD's seem to be favored because they play nice with RAID. If you aren't interested in RAID then just get any 3 TB drive that makes you happy or is on sale at the time.
 
I guess I should have said that I want internal drives as well and I don't have usb 3.0 unfortunately, I'm a broke U.S. Marine gents...sorry. So an Intel 320 SSD and a few random 3TB is what I'm going with it looks like (Not going with Hitachi as the 3TB still have some bad ratings on the egg). Thanks for all of the recommendation's gent's. :D

Edit: Can anyone recommend a good 3TB that doesn't require the external controller...that isn't a deathstar?
Edit2: Would an external 3TB drive not require a controller if I gutted it? Does this void the warranty if you do this?
 
Last edited:
jctess87 said:
I have a budget of I'd say around $500 total right now. However after I get a few large capacity HDD's to move all of my junk to I can sell all of my other HDD's so more like around $700-750 total. I guess I've decided to go with the SSD and a few 3TB HDD's for now I just need to know what brand and model of SSD to go with now, and what brand and model of 3TB HDD's to go with now.
Click to expand...

The Hitachi Deskstar drives are $180. If you don't need performance and want to save more heat (you still haven't explained your priorities), you can save a bit by getting the 5400 RPM model for $140. Two of the 7200 RPM drives are $360, leaving you only $140 for your SSD. You'd need to add $40 to afford an 80 GB Intel SSD Drive.

I think expecting $200 to $250 for all of the drives you have now, used, is a bit starry-eyed.

After spending $500, you're right where you started: 6TB total storage, though you have the 80 gigs on the SSD. Why do you think spending $500 is worth reducing the count of drives in your system?
 
mikeblas said:
The Hitachi Deskstar drives are $180. If you don't need performance and want to save more heat (you still haven't explained your priorities), you can save a bit by getting the 5400 RPM model for $140. Two of the 7200 RPM drives are $360, leaving you only $140 for your SSD. You'd need to add $40 to afford an 80 GB Intel SSD Drive.

I think expecting $200 to $250 for all of the drives you have now, used, is a bit starry-eyed.

After spending $500, you're right where you started: 6TB total storage, though you have the 80 gigs on the SSD. Why do you think spending $500 is worth reducing the count of drives in your system?
Click to expand...

I'm not getting Deskstar drives, I've checked with multiple tech websites across the internet, and multiple places that sell them still looking at customer reviews and they are still deathstar's maybe not as much now, however they are still dying often apparently and it's not something I'd like to deal with, at all. I want 7200RPM drives as well and as I said they'd be Western Digital most likely it appears as the reviews I've read on those have been less DOA's and ones dying within months. As far as the SSD if I have to break $500 at the start with that so be it. I'm going to get a 240GB model I've decided on an Intel 320 SSD due to recommendations within this thread. Now all I need to know is there a way to have a 3TB WD drive without the little add on card? Thanks.
 
jctess87 said:
I'm not getting Deskstar drives, I've checked with multiple tech websites across the internet, and multiple places that sell them still looking at customer reviews and they are still deathstar's maybe not as much now, however they are still dying often apparently and it's not something I'd like to deal with, at all. I want 7200RPM drives as well and as I said they'd be Western Digital most likely it appears as the reviews I've read on those have been less DOA's and ones dying within months. As far as the SSD if I have to break $500 at the start with that so be it. I'm going to get a 240GB model I've decided on an Intel 320 SSD due to recommendations within this thread. Now all I need to know is there a way to have a 3TB WD drive without the little add on card? Thanks.
Click to expand...

The reputed quality of hard drives is really a myth. All models of all brands of all drives are sometimes DOA, and sometimes have problems. Consumers, like you, are dealing with such small samples of the products that it really doesn't matter. If you're more comfortable with a certain brand, then go for it -- I usually get WD drives just because the warranty service is better.

I don't see a 240 GB model in the Intel 320 SSD series on the Intel website.

If you don't want to explain your goals, that's fine -- but I'm not sure what the purpose of your question is, then. I hope you enjoy your new drives.
 
Last edited:
Your repeated use of the term "deathstar" is ridiculous. Many people on this forum who have owned more "deathstars" than you and I will ever own HDD's have had 0-2 failures. I have never had any of my Hitachi 2 TB drives fail. I have had most of my WD green drives fail. Only one is original. Just buy what you want for whatever money you want to spend and forget everything you have been told here. Newegg reviews on HDD's are absolutely no intelligent way to measure reliability. The ONLY statistics I have heard of which even remotely sound reliable for such data were produced by the Google HDD study and they aren't releasing information on which brand drives failed more often. I will now join the rank of the more seasoned veterans of the forum and not pay attention to this thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top