![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
Seagate hard drives = CRAP
- Thread starter ktk
- Start date
results from my first "tickin' timebomb"Seagate Harddisk. god that tick can wake you up at night while sleeping (com and me in same room).
anyone has this issue? around 20 or so users in Taiwan have this problem FYI. nasty.
5 year warranty, ha.cant even last 5 weeks.First one started ticking 5 hours into use. damn.
Slartibartfast
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2004
- Messages
- 7,280
I run only seagate drives, have yet to have one die. WD, on the other hand....
Fact is, every manufacturer has lemons, that's just how it goes.
Fact is, every manufacturer has lemons, that's just how it goes.
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2006
- Messages
- 13,984
It's also possible that your delivery company isn't handling the drives very nicely.
I would head over to the PSU forums and ask them. I could not find that brand in the sticky, nor have I heard of it.
Slartibartfast
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2004
- Messages
- 7,280
Yeah, that brand name doesn't ring a bell, so I'd label it "suspicious."
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2006
- Messages
- 13,984
Slartibartfast said:
Here's a 450w model from AcBel. It's not the same model lineup, or prbably not even the same manufacturer as the OP's model though.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16817117003
unhappy_mage
[H]ard|DCer of the Month - October 2005
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2004
- Messages
- 11,455
The problems with your drive are most likely due to your power supply. Is there an online retailer that will ship to you that you could link? That will let us suggest a better one.
Until you've checked the power supply (do you own a digital multimeter?) I'd assume that's the problem.
Where did you buy the drives from?
Until you've checked the power supply (do you own a digital multimeter?) I'd assume that's the problem.
Where did you buy the drives from?
EnderW said:
Personally I think that's a silly argument. Of course, your experience with a drive does not represent a statistically significant sample, but it's still important to know which drives generally are more reliable. A large survey could accomplish that, which storage review is doing. Why they don't reference it on the above page I'm not sure.
One could actually apply the argument you linked to to cars or planes also. Like: "It's not really important to worry about how often each model of car or plane crashes. Unless you're driving hundreds of cars or planes at the same time you won't see those same statistical results necassarily play out. You could buy only Toyotas yet have them all fail, but that doesn't mean that Toyota is a bad brand. So based on this logic there cannot possibly be any relationship between reliability and hard drive brand. Anyone who thinks there is is an uneducated Pleibian."
Get a clue.Hvatum said:
You analogy is utterly ridiculous.
The point is, whether or not a drive is going to fail depends upon if it was damaged during shipping, poor handling by user, bad PSU, or lack of airflow, not simply by the brand.
Also, this thread should be locked IMO.
To OP: Obviously if the largest hard drive maker in the world had a reputation for making drives prone to failure we would know about it. Instead of making baseless accusations, try examining your system to find the true cause of the failures, most likely your no name PSU, which if you knew anything about computers, you wouldn't be using in the first place.
The point is, whether or not a car is going to fail depends upon if it was damaged during driving, poor maintance by user, bad oil, or lack of oil changes, not simply by the brand..EnderW said:
Is it possible that brand, as well as the conditions of use could play a role in the reliability of a drive or car? NO WAY! I hate to offend the current dogma of hard-forums here, but brand does make a difference and should be payed attention to. Obviously buying a brand which is more or less reliable does not guarentee any single given drive will break or not break. Someone can still hit a very reliable drive with a hammer and it will stop working - on the other hand an unreliable brand can perform very well.
Go and check out the Storage Review reliability survey results, because they actually do have Seagate in the lead for reliability. Of course, as the OP's case proves, this does not mean every single model of Seagate drive is reliable or without problems. In fact some specific models or runs might be very bad (eg. Deathstars) - this is actually all the more reason to know what your buying though. If you go with a tested and true model of a good brand you significantly improve your chances that the drive will be reliable - seems to me common sense.
Astrogiblet
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2006
- Messages
- 1,147
Yea, I only have faith in Seagate drives. They have never done me wrong, where I have lost 3 or 4 western digitals in a short period of time. Also, any company that is willing to ad two more years of warranty to their product then all the other companies must know that their drives are better and will last longer.
And, typically, newegg reviewers report a lot more problems with WD drives, and they get lower ratings, where seagate users report less problems, and have higher ratings.
And, typically, newegg reviewers report a lot more problems with WD drives, and they get lower ratings, where seagate users report less problems, and have higher ratings.
Astrogiblet
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2006
- Messages
- 1,147
Oh, I guess I should mention I'm running 2 500gb seagate drives right now. The 16mb cache, sata II ones. They have been running 24/7 under pretty heavy load (I move and deal with a lot of data) for a few months now without a single problem.
unhappy_mage
[H]ard|DCer of the Month - October 2005
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2004
- Messages
- 11,455
I have 10 seagates in operation right now - 8 320s and 2 IDE 120s. The 320s have been running 24/7 since August; the 120s have been taking a pounding doing everything from boot disk to scratch disk to torrent drive since 2003.
I also have or had 6 or 7 maxtors, and one or two WD (I can't remember what one drive was). I've experienced zero failures when I was using a reputable power supply (remember, nothing kills hardware like a Deer).
I also have or had 6 or 7 maxtors, and one or two WD (I can't remember what one drive was). I've experienced zero failures when I was using a reputable power supply (remember, nothing kills hardware like a Deer
). tuskenraider
Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2003
- Messages
- 839
Bah, they're just trying to get more market share. Sorta like Hyundai's 100,000 warrantly. Doesn't make the product any better. Both with take some losses for that.
swatbat
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2001
- Messages
- 13,085
protias said:
I don't know about this. First drive failed. Second drive is prob a refurb from seagate. I've had nothing but problems with refurbs. When I use to work as a notebook tech I had to deal with refurb drives from all the vendors daily. Hell I've had 5 drives bad in a row.
My personal view on hard drives is if one dies I just buy a new one. They are one thing that I don't trust a refurb on.
swatbat said:
I know how you feel....
BTW i figured out that a RMA isnt worth my moolah and time, esp time.
RMA > 5 bucks post and one to two weeks for the damn thing to come back.
I NEED my computer for w.ork, so its buy one new one and sell the damn RMA part away cheap when it comes back IMHO..
Hvatum said:The point is, whether or not a car is going to fail depends upon if it was damaged during driving, poor maintance by user, bad oil, or lack of oil changes, not simply by the brand..
[...]
I suggest you pay a visit to the drive reliability survey over at SR. While I still think that their samples is too small, you will notice that the same brand can have widely varying percentile scores.
If you look at the Baracude 7200.7 and compare it to the 7200.8 both drives have hundreds of responses and completely different percentile scores...
oh yes, to view the results you need to enter at least one drive, but preferably all the drives that you own.
TechLarry
RIP [H] Brother - June 1, 2022
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2005
- Messages
- 30,481
I have 10 in use as well. 7200.7's through 7200.10's. I've only had one segate failure in 5 years, and that's a 7200.7 160GB that just recently failed after about 3 years.
-Larry
-Larry
unhappy_mage said:I have 10 seagates in operation right now - 8 320s and 2 IDE 120s. The 320s have been running 24/7 since August; the 120s have been taking a pounding doing everything from boot disk to scratch disk to torrent drive since 2003.
I also have or had 6 or 7 maxtors, and one or two WD (I can't remember what one drive was). I've experienced zero failures when I was using a reputable power supply (remember, nothing kills hardware like a Deer
unhappy_mage
[H]ard|DCer of the Month - October 2005
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2004
- Messages
- 11,455
RE drives are not recommended for single-drive usage.ktk said:
Use the serial numbers of the drives if you do buy lottery tickets
codegrinder
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2005
- Messages
- 1,509
I think we need to make individual threads for each mfg. that way people can bitch in those threads.
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2006
- Messages
- 13,984
unhappy_mage said:RE drives are not recommended for single-drive usage.
Use the serial numbers of the drives if you do buy lottery tickets
why not? I've been using an RE drive for the last 5 months, well up to about two weeks ago.
REs are meant for hardware RAID controller because their TLER (Time Limited Error Recovery) is different, instead of 4 ms or something that a desktop requires, they are in to full seconds of waiting until mentioning an error because RAID cards operate differently. You can run REs as a single drive but it is not recommended.
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2006
- Messages
- 13,984
Sparkyy said:
I though it was the other way around, RAID contollers were having problems waiting on WD's desktop drives because they weren't responding due to error recovery times. Then RAID controller would time out and drop the drive from the array. So in effect, the RE drives have a shorter error recovery time than non RE's, giving way to better performance.
Have I been misled?
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2006
- Messages
- 13,984
Sparkyy said:
Okay this is straight from WD's site. http://www.westerndigital.com/en/products/products.asp?driveid=249&language=en
Yes, and nothing I said went against WD. As I said, a NON-RE drive will take like 4 ms to fix the error it encountered. However a RE drive will, and I said 8 seconds but it is actually 7 seconds, fix the error on the RAID card side so that the drive can keep going. Meaning the RAID card will mark the area as a bad sector and ignore it and the array won't break.
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2006
- Messages
- 13,984
Sparkyy said:
and I emphasize
:
what I got out of that is that desktop drive can take up to a few minutes to recover and respond, thus letting the RAID contoller think it's not there and it'll drop it from the array. RE drives are limited in the amount of time they have to recover from an error, if they can't do it by 7 seconds they give up and hand the error over to the RAID controller to take care of. Doesn't necessarily mean it'll take the whole 7 seconds every time.
unhappy_mage
[H]ard|DCer of the Month - October 2005
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2004
- Messages
- 11,455
Not exactly. The TLER means there's a cap on how long the drive will try (7 seconds or whatever). Without TLER there's a much higher cap - it'll keep trying for longer than 7 seconds. This is good for desktop drives - when you've only got one drive, it's the only place to get the data from, so it has to keep trying as long as possible. But with a raid controller and a redundant array, there are other places to get the data - the parity from the other drives, or the mirror. So waiting 30 seconds when the other drive has the data is counterproductive.Sparkyy said:
drizzt81 said:
Yes, these are exactly the results I'm referring to. If you take all of each brand's models, weighted by the number of owners, Seagate comes out on top. Of course some models rate better and some rate worse. It may even be possible that 7200.8 is a less reliable model. Not everything is a statiscal abberation.
Now, you can say that a sample size less then ~10,000 is meaningless, but I do think that the storage review drive survey is large enough to draw some meaningful conclusions from. Certainlly results so far suggest Seagate is a more reliable brand. It also suggests that Western Digital, though on average behind, does produce a very reliable brand in the case of their Raptor line. Perhaps differing manufacturing standards for high end vrs. low end brands and models could make a difference in reliability? Seems like common sense to me.
Dark Ember
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2001
- Messages
- 2,021
Geez, I haven't logged into the forums in 2 months, and nothing has changed.
For the every day user, ALL BRANDS are equally reliable. The DPPM numbers are so low for any given manufacturer, your chances of getting a "busted" one out of the chute vary by tenths to hundreds of a percent. If you get a broken drive, it is most likely that something else is the cause - and it's usually handling damage or power - like was mentioned above.
The only exception to this is situations like the IBM 75GXP's a while back that had a design flaw - and we all hear about big problems like those. Companies can't afford to ship drives that are going to break all the time. The margins on hard drives are too slim and the cost associated with the warranty returns would kill them.
I'm sure when I come back in another 2 months, there will be a similar thread. Sigh....
For the every day user, ALL BRANDS are equally reliable. The DPPM numbers are so low for any given manufacturer, your chances of getting a "busted" one out of the chute vary by tenths to hundreds of a percent. If you get a broken drive, it is most likely that something else is the cause - and it's usually handling damage or power - like was mentioned above.
The only exception to this is situations like the IBM 75GXP's a while back that had a design flaw - and we all hear about big problems like those. Companies can't afford to ship drives that are going to break all the time. The margins on hard drives are too slim and the cost associated with the warranty returns would kill them.
I'm sure when I come back in another 2 months, there will be a similar thread. Sigh....
Dark Ember said:Geez, I haven't logged into the forums in 2 months, and nothing has changed.
For the every day user, ALL BRANDS are equally reliable. The DPPM numbers are so low for any given manufacturer, your chances of getting a "busted" one out of the chute vary by tenths to hundreds of a percent. If you get a broken drive, it is most likely that something else is the cause - and it's usually handling damage or power - like was mentioned above.
The only exception to this is situations like the IBM 75GXP's a while back that had a design flaw - and we all hear about big problems like those. Companies can't afford to ship drives that are going to break all the time. The margins on hard drives are too slim and the cost associated with the warranty returns would kill them.
I'm sure when I come back in another 2 months, there will be a similar thread. Sigh....
Exactly, when will these Plebeians figure it out? I scoff at these fools who believe there could be a difference in reliability between brand, model or price range. Obviously such things are a mere trifle - completely irrelevant to people of finer stock such as you and I. Indeed I studied this subject to an exhaustive depth under the tutelage of Sir. Comstock, learned fellow of the Royal Society.
In the case that anyone here shall seek to resume this debate, you may present yourself at your leisure, preferably in the hall Gentleman's Fencing club, located on Trafalgar Square. There we will have the pleasure of further discussing this with the sustenance of Tea and Crumpets, baked by the Royal House of Baking, by appointment of the Queen.
2 months? more like next week.Dark Ember said:Geez, I haven't logged into the forums in 2 months, and nothing has changed.
For the every day user, ALL BRANDS are equally reliable. The DPPM numbers are so low for any given manufacturer, your chances of getting a "busted" one out of the chute vary by tenths to hundreds of a percent. If you get a broken drive, it is most likely that something else is the cause - and it's usually handling damage or power - like was mentioned above.
The only exception to this is situations like the IBM 75GXP's a while back that had a design flaw - and we all hear about big problems like those. Companies can't afford to ship drives that are going to break all the time. The margins on hard drives are too slim and the cost associated with the warranty returns would kill them.
I'm sure when I come back in another 2 months, there will be a similar thread. Sigh....
It will be right next to the "how much faster will my games load with RAID0?", "which of these almost identical hard drives will be better?", and "how fast is a Raptor?" threads