![[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 or western digital
- Thread starter mito
- Start date
CyberDeus-RagDoll
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2006
- Messages
- 1,223
Warranty periods.
Seagate = 5years vs
WD = 3years. (or 1 year if the WD is retail boxed)
You decide
What do you think I picked?
unhappy_mage
[H]ard|DCer of the Month - October 2005
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2004
- Messages
- 11,455
The WD is cheaper at ZZF than at Newegg.
CyberDeus-RagDoll
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2006
- Messages
- 1,223
seagate?
Uhm, yeah.
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 23,983
Seagates are faster as they use the new perpendicular technology.
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 23,983
Maybe there is a problem with your PSU or mobo and not the drives if 2 fail that fast, or perhaps the place you bought them from sells bad returned drives? for 2 drives to fail that fast i would look to other places of blame, not seagate.
unhappy_mage
[H]ard|DCer of the Month - October 2005
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2004
- Messages
- 11,455
So does WD. So does Hitachi. So does Samsung. They're all perpendicular.
Not that that should be a selling point. Buying a drive because it's perpendicular is silly - it's not making anything faster, just denser. You generally get drives with fewer platters that way... but not always.
Well, I'm running it along with a 20GB Quantum that has no problems.
I get this noise that sounds like an owl coming from the drive, and when it does it, the entire system hangs for 5-10 seconds.
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 23,983
CyberDeus-RagDoll
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2006
- Messages
- 1,223
Or it could just be back luck. I usually run 8 to 16 drives in a system, and on my upgrade path from 300->400->500->750, I've only had to return -1- seagate (although the 500s were maxtor branded seagates)
So, that means, We're talking about 1 out of 52 drives (12 300s, to 16 400s, 12 500s, 12 750s), over a 3 year period.
I don't keep drives long enough to need the 5 year warranty, but I have had drives more than 3 years. (The drives I own get handed down to other systems before really being retired..)
I got burned on 1 year warranties before.
thebeephaha
2[H]4U
- Joined
- May 27, 2007
- Messages
- 2,054
I am a Seagate man but WD does make good drives. Also not all WD drives are perpendiculars, only a select few are so Seagate has a head start between the two.
abcdelight
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2006
- Messages
- 1,275
WD for me.
I have always had them but have been open to try anything else. When I read reviews WD is consistently in the top spots all around. Other brands seem to have their marginal champ here or there but WD seems to rule the spectrum as a whole. Sometimes WD seems a bit slower to adopt new tech but I see that as prudent and I trust that attitude. I am sure the top brands are all pretty good and failures are probably more related to shippng/stocking abuses. I like retail drives because they have boxes to brace them. I don't order drives in mail by themselves - too easy to throw small package around. I like the newer WD's that lock mechanisms away from contact with surfaces when not in use. I bet that cuts down on handling induced failures right there. With new flash drives on horizen things could change. Canon pulled ahead of Nikon when digital cameras took off. Interesting to see what happens.
I have always had them but have been open to try anything else. When I read reviews WD is consistently in the top spots all around. Other brands seem to have their marginal champ here or there but WD seems to rule the spectrum as a whole. Sometimes WD seems a bit slower to adopt new tech but I see that as prudent and I trust that attitude. I am sure the top brands are all pretty good and failures are probably more related to shippng/stocking abuses. I like retail drives because they have boxes to brace them. I don't order drives in mail by themselves - too easy to throw small package around. I like the newer WD's that lock mechanisms away from contact with surfaces when not in use. I bet that cuts down on handling induced failures right there. With new flash drives on horizen things could change. Canon pulled ahead of Nikon when digital cameras took off. Interesting to see what happens.
Seems like mage already answered that. IIRC, Seagate had it first, then Hitachi, and finally WD (not sure where Samsung fits in there).
Older drives don't seem to be affected as much by power ripple as newer drives.
Warranty periods.
Seagate = 5years vs
WD = 3years. (or 1 year if the WD is retail boxed)
You decide
What do you think I picked?
warranty periods doesnt really make much sence on OEM drives , there are some threads about that issue that you dont get the full period on OEM drives .
I would like to see that information straight from the manufacturer. I know with WD and Seagate honor their warranties.
I would also question where I was getting the drives... was the packaging done well? I had an older WD go bad on me once, never had a problem with Seagate. That being said I haven't had any trouble with my 3 raptors. I would go with Seagate for the warranty but in the end I think they are both good companies.
CyberDeus-RagDoll
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2006
- Messages
- 1,223
Never had that happen in my business. We -ALWAYS- get our warranties honored.
The reason why Retail warranties are less for some manufacturers, is because they know that the people who buy retail harddrives, more often than not, don't know what the fuck they are doing, and are more likely to break something, then the knowledgable technicians who buy 200 harddrives a week, and don't need the retail packaging.
And the winner is...........
Western Digital Caviar.
I always liked the name Caviar. It's classy.
But.. Barracuda's are snappy! and they swim fast, and they eat caviar! (well, the eat everything)
Meh, I'd be leaning away from WD.
After my fiasco with their 5000AAKS series, I may go Samsung/Seagate from now on. It comes down to consistency in production. My first was slower, sluggish and got 20ms+ on random access time. WD thinks something is wrong and gives me an RMA #. A few days later, I have another 5000AAKS - this one is snappier, faster, and it's reflected by it's 13ms random access time.
It's just way too much variance. I don't know bout you guys, but while I've been loyal to WD, I think i'll check out Hitachi/Samsung next time.
After my fiasco with their 5000AAKS series, I may go Samsung/Seagate from now on. It comes down to consistency in production. My first was slower, sluggish and got 20ms+ on random access time. WD thinks something is wrong and gives me an RMA #. A few days later, I have another 5000AAKS - this one is snappier, faster, and it's reflected by it's 13ms random access time.
It's just way too much variance. I don't know bout you guys, but while I've been loyal to WD, I think i'll check out Hitachi/Samsung next time.
masteraleph
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2005
- Messages
- 435
Interesting that you've drawn this conclusion. If they though something was wrong, gave you an RMA #, and you got back a drive that works properly, that implies to me that there probably WAS something wrong with the first drive. They did exactly what you'd hope for, which is RMA it. What exactly would you expect otherwise from Hitachi or Samsung?
Well the smoking gun is that my problem is NOT an isolated incident. When another post complained of the same problems, I initially thought of it as nothing. I had given up on finding why my HD was getting 20ms+ on access time. However, when he mentioned that he was using 2 x 5000AAKS's in the same machine, that raised some suspicion.
This eliminated his hardware/mobo (and my mobo consequently) as the problem. One was a 75TMA while the other was a 00TMA. My drive was a 65TMA, and like the other poster, had slower access. The drive I get back from RMA is a 00TMA, and just like him, the slow access problem is gone.