Is there really a difference between WD red/blue/whatever other then slightly different logic in the controller? Is there a reason one cost more other then >muh Jews ripping us off?
Also general HDD thread
Is there really a difference between WD red/blue/whatever other then slightly different logic in the controller? Is there a reason one cost more other then >muh Jews ripping us off?
Also general HDD thread
with Jews you loose
When I looked into reds a few years ago I'd read that they have physical and logical countermeasures for the vibrational harmonics that happen in NAS devices
Black drives use ramp loading while reds use an air cushion to park heads when they are not in use.
Reds are meant for continuous 24/7 use without being stopped and restarted, if you treat them like normal drives they will die faster than normal.
Black drives (along with blues and greens) actually park the heads when not in use on a ramp that prevents any damage to the drive when they are not in use. They are made to be stopped and restarted as per normal use.
I bought blues for my nas to save money
Did I fuck up?
Blues should be fine enough.
Just remember to back up your nas every so often to a normally unconnected drive in a place where fire or thieves cannot get to it. As long as you do that you can't truly fuck up.
If you're putting it in RAID why does it matter?
If you're not, why aren't you using an SSD instead?
Black is very loud. You may say "but user, it's just a hdd!" but it really is insanely loud. And yes, there is a difference between slow and fast hard drives.
if you don't maintain multiple offsite airgapped backups, in multiple countries and multiple continents, preferably taking into account the distribution of the perseids and proximity to nearby ley lines when choosing your backup locations, you're asking to lose your data and tbh i hope you do lose all your data - you're an amateur and you deserve it.
Build quality and intention, primarily. Greens shut down often to "save electricity". Golds are "server-grade" and reliable. WD themselves explain this, do you really need to ask?
Stop this meme. It's good for a boot disk and some operations, but
Can confirm, I got a Re4 2TB in my desktop and even with AAM set to 0 and a Define R4 case it's loud as living fuck.
Hah, funny, I have a Define R4 too. But yeah, when I bought the wd black back then I told myself that it couldn't be that bad, but it really is. It's almost not worth the money, I can hear that shit through my headphones sometimes.
have wd blacks from like 5years ago, not a single problem,
heard horror stories of everything else red, blue etc
I have a 2.5 inch 500GB WD Black from 2011 that still works fine, has about 20k power on hours IIRC.
I have a wd blue from 2009, and 2 external wd discs from 2011. Last year I bought a 4tb drive because I thought all three of them would die any second now, but they are still working. I actually reached the point where I am sitting here hoping for them to die already. The anticipation is killing me.
You don't want parking of heads when not in use. That's what fucking killed Greens faster than anything.
Have a 2TB WD green one, it is 5 years old or so.
I thought they would be shit but no, they are good and do what they are supposed to.
I hope you've modified the firmware so its not parking the heads every 5 seconds.
Green drives park the hard drive head and reduce speed after a 5 second timeout to save power. It's notorious for killing them prematurely because 5 seconds is the same amount of time modern OSes batch up background writes so it's constantly changing speed, parking and loading the heads. You can cheat death by running wdidle.exe or hdparm on them to change the timeout to something sane like 30, after which they're basically the same as black/blue drives.
Any HDD that is not Hitachi is total trash regardless of colour.
o fuck i lol'd. this is basically what every reddit faggot says unironically when asked if raid 6 is a good way to add some fault tolerance.
the $60 7k3000 refurb special is my current go-to
I have a 1tb wd blue from 2011, 32700 power on hours and the thing is still chugging along fine.
A 2008 seagate finaly died on me. Not heavily used but at least SMART gave ample warning of impending doom. Very unlike seagate and their typical sudden death
For as much shit as seagates get I have a bunch that are still going strong after heavy use.
im just lucky?
I'm using an eight year old WD Green :^)
the PC I had before that died after 5 years
Reds are built a lot tougher and meant for CCTV, blacks are a bit faster than the others and blues are generic hard drives and there's little special about them.
That is minimum guaranteed writes, usually around 300 TiB. I write 3 TiB per year, so thats 100 years of using it. Obviously won't last that long, but "planned obsolescence", really???
And that is for smaller 120 GB SSDs, the higher capacity it is the longer it will last, since it spreads the writes onto multiple sectors.
That's the limit of the technology. You can literally buy some cheapest garbage HDD and use cheap 64GB SSD for caching it.
SSDs are one of the best advancements in personal computers in almost a decade.
I encrypt every single hard drive but you can never be sure wether data on a SSD has been trully deleted. Not to mention that their prices are outrageous.
wow kid I can remember when HDD had similar price per megabyte, go back to bed
Oh, and with your microscope you can see the 0s and 1s on the disk platters of your hard disks?
>muh SSD controller security! if that's what you're going to come back at me with
NSAware confirmed to have been written to HDD firmware as well. If you are targeted, you are targeted, and things like "My SSD/HDD may not have deleted the things I told it to!" will be the least of your worries, guaranteed. If you are that paranoid and your hurtcore CP collection is that precious to you, you have a brick of thermite and an igniter hovering over a column of your backups and currently running drives within arms reach. Stop being a retard. A few of these TLC SSDs (you can buy MLC now) have over 400 TB written with two writing
over 2PB written
to them before failure.
Only in greens and reds, now just reds.
I remember when a Z80 computer with 64 KB RAM costed $1000 (in 1984 dollars) but that doesn't mean you should pay that much today for equivalent power. HDD came down in price a whole lot, but now they're looking for other ways to profit, so the SSD fairy pops up. All of a sudden everything is expensive again, just like magic!
You could brick older SSD's by just writing random data to them until they were full. And since I use encryption this is what happened to me before.
Also they tend to slow down over time like the pro 840.
SSD's do not fail but will lose data through blocks dying. You will lose data and this will increase with age, you will notice it around the 3 year mark.
I have an Intel X-25M from 2008 that's still kicking ass despite having spent part of its life in a CI build server and the rest doing video capture/editing for a WoW guild that raided hard. Stats are that it has 95% of its usable life left despite heavy use. Even with Intel Jewing us out of TRIM on this model (they disabled it to pressure people to upgrade to the X-25M G2) it's still quite fast.
It doesnt increase with age. Where did you get that info??? The sectors wear down by writes. I have a 3 years old SSD, it is in perfect condition. First few generations of SSDs had failure problems, nowadays a lot less.
Losing data = definition of failure for storage devices. SSDs start losing data after around few hundereds of tb written to them. Thats why you buy 250gb+ SSDs.
ITT: SSD shills and faggots with buyer's remorse trying to justify being jewed.
Same here, but bought the drive in 2012.
I really don't understand this maymay of disks getting wrecked.
I also have an old hdd taken from a laptop, it's at least 10 years old and I still use it from time to time.
If you calculate the price per TB with the same reliability it's a win for SSDs. It's why all datacenters are almost exclusively SSD today. I've not used a mechanical drive on a server in almost a decade.
If you need that extra storage obviously HDD is better option for you. Nobody said otherwise. You can have SSD for important files, cheap shitty HDD for junk files (your precious Chinese cartoon) and 1 extra shitty HDD for backup.
Nice logic there. Get help man.
Does having 8 TB of mongolian wood carvings qualify as needing help? I also archive entire websites and shit like the Archive Team does.
Smart, I want to do the same.
I do the same with Toughbook and ThinkPad related shit, since there's so much disinfo about them on the internet
How is that a bad thing? Sometimes I come across a 500GB megapack. I download the entire thing and sort through it later when I have time for it. I did this a few times and my 4TB hdd is almost full. And then there are stolen passwords. You never know how long they last. I had a met-art account once, and I downloaded everything I found there. Because the account could be banned the next day so better download everything you can.
I am not the user you replied too by the way, I am some other user who happens to hoard a lot of porn. Can't wait for the future where 10+ TB becomes the standard.
your mind has been jewed hard
wew, people found it's way into Holla Forums too? Nothing wrong with a little porn.
I use reds in my RAID 1 array in my daily use machine. I turn it on and off daily. Should I buy something else? I like the reds because they are reasonably priced and I've had no less than five greens fail on me. I've read that the blues are now what used to be the greens. So far I've only had to replace 1 red drive for bad sectors.
I'm and I have ~22TB worth of storage because I hoard lots of stuff that may dissapear literally forever.
I have around 250GB of porn. You may or may not know but several years ago (back at 4chan) people flipped their shit when Fakku messed with Sadpanda because VERY few people bothered to keep a local copy. Before that everyone went:
Guess who didn't give a shit and fapped to lolis while everyone panicked?
Just an example about how quick a huge centralized collection may dissapear without notice.
People say things on the internet stay forever but that is not usually the case. Maybe they are there but just difficult to access. I regret not downloading all those old hentai OVAs on bakabt I just bookmarked thinking I could always download them later.
This is true, stuff gets lost all the time
This is why I autistically horde shit
Yeah I had to learn this the hard way too. Pictures, stories, videos... I also bookmarked lot's of good content only to lose it.
fug, i only have 9TB, i horded a lot of shit after the whole TPP scare.
My SSD has melted through its power cable and almost started a fire for the second time. Despite being a little overcooked on one corner, the damned thing still works for the time being.
What can I do to make sure my next SSD doesn't catch fire?
Stop buying garbage. Samsung and Intel make good SSDs.
Great argument, nigger.
samsung does not make good ssd
see tlc fiasco
crucial is better, and even then had problems with firmware
Any SLC > Any MLC > Any TLC > Any QLC for reliability, and reliability is what makes SSD's good, read speed is just the cherry on top
So my hard drive sounds like a coffee maker and i'm planning to buy another one. Would it be a bad idea to buy a refurbished one?
refurbished hitachi ultrastar on newegg, they will have between 18-20K hours on them with very few power ons
I was planning on getting a refurbished western digital one.
Can't go wrong with Hitachi, they're one of the most reliable HDD brands out there.
The loud as fuck WD RAPTOR meme drives in my powermac G5 are still working fine. They are from 2006 iirc.
I find the parking/spin down isn't really a problem in my use case. I have greens in my NAS and they completely spin down and stay down until a file is needed off one. The delay on 1st access is always annoying but at least I am not spinning drives that are idle 99% of the time. I agree if your using them in a desktop they will get hammered if you don't fix the park/spindown timer.
Check the spec sheets:
There are read-write speed/cache differences, but if you buy a HDD today, it is probably not your concern.
Noise levels vary between 20-36 dBA.
WD Black - 5 years warranty
WD Blue - 2 years warranty
WD Red - 3 years warranty
WD Red Pro - 5 years warranty
WD Green - end of life, no longer in production, if you have one use it as an external backup drive, or with one of those drive bays which can disconnect the device when not needed
WD Gold - not for you
WD Purple - not for you
If you want more than 2 drives in a chassis, you should only pick Reds:
WD Black and Blue PC Hard Drives are tested and recommended for use in consumer-type RAID applications (RAID 0 and RAID 1).*
* WD Black and Blue PC Hard Drives are not recommended for and are not warranted for use in RAID environments utilizing Enterprise HBAs and/or expanders and in multi-bay chassis as they are not designed for, nor tested in, these specific types of RAID applications.
holy fuck you are retarded
All of my WD raptors lasted until I couldn't deal with the lack of space for their applications and replaced (in last two years) with SSD. Good drives and yes, loud as fuck.
Oh you little teeny children, how young and new you are. Or you're hard drive company shills. Either way people aren't buying it.
Hard drives are the rewritable DVD of current year, only useful when you want to save some money by using slow media.
You know, once we have affordable 4-8tb ssd I will stop using hdd.
SSDs pay for themselves in the long run because they use less power than mechanical drives.
When we have affordable 4tb DDR4 dimms i'll stop using DDR3.
The point is that there are reasons to own both, stop pretending to be retarded.
Oh yea sorry I read your message wrong, thought you said you wouldn't use SSDs until 4-8tb versions were affordable.
I will now proceed to gut myself to atone for my sins.
No need to feel bad, I guess I kinda overreacted there.
Just get ultrastars and call it good.
I have 6 grey market ones that have been performing well for the past 3 years, and 3 more NOS still under warranty coming.
Out of the 14 blacks I have, 2 have failed within 5 years.
WD kikes bought out Hitachi and re-branded HGST ultrastars as their new enterprise disks.
WD4002FYYZ have the exact same case pattern as ultrastar disks.
The real issue with hard drives is cheap backups.
I'm torn between a used LTO library and trying to find a fucking bluray library.
Crucial is garbage, you have 'range anxiety' for HDs, and it's latency that makes SSDs good.
Their name is slapped on top, but the manufacturing and R&D is done by an increasingly failing and outsourced company headquartered in Boise.
For what purpose? I have one, 4TB for about $130, bretty gud.
No one needs more than 1TB. Buying more space rather than confront your hoarding problem is unhealthy.
Things like archive.org exist with a reason, you dummy. There's no reason one shouldn't archive everything one comes across.
and HDDs break if you look at them funny
every company in tech is cancer period
but yes, I still only buy HDDs. why would I pay extra money for this bullshit? i guess then I'd be able to open firefux in less than 10 minutes, but by the time I get around to getting an SSD for this, the web will be dead anyway
they're only slow because your software is dog shit. they plug 50 script kiddie frameworks and libraries together that write a bunch of shit to disk as a form of IPC and fix this by upping reccomended HDD specs
t. reverse engineered software and muh AAA games and found they all do this bullshit. your stupid high performance tech is just compensating for shitcode. and even with your expensive bullshit it will still spike all the time
t. guy who does not work with big data sets.
Never mind that there are clear differences between hoarding, archiving and collecting. I have big archives of business data which I have to keep for legal reasons, out of a moral obligation to the people I do business with and because they could be interesting form a historic standpoint in a few decades. I also have big, well organized collections of things I frequently use and which my grandchildren will have a great time discovering one day.
Just read the technical datasheets of the harddrives fetch them on the WD website.
Do you also have 3000 confirmed kills tho
Because nobody in the world ever does any work or business, right?
Using reds instead of blues/blacks should be fine in the sort term. Just make sure to keep your data backed up. It isn't a huge issue, the reds will just not last as long as normal, which may still mean they'll last some time.
In general, I would follow this strategy if buying WD drives:
Blue - normal drive use, not as fast as black
Black - normal drive use and program/OS storage
Green - Detached/Cold storage
Red/Purple/Gold - Continuous 24 hour use. If you plan on never shutting your computer off then these are fine. You cannot trust the MTBF if you are restarting these drives constantly.
I have 6TB of videos
they have their own physical box running kodi and have backups
somehow this setup is less expensive than buying BRs for all of that
black is the real meme. muh 2% difference (at cost of more noise and heat)
and considering the variants (handling, usage, factory duds) you can't trust MTBF at all. plenty of stories of people owning drives that malfunction within MTBF vs stories of drives that survived 10+ years in a pirate ship.
I usually go with western digital hard drives but I went with a seagate barracuda 2tb.
just reading through the thread i'm starting to feel worried. How bad did I fuck up?
Don't shoot the messenger. Living in digital filth is the same psych issue as real world hoarding. You're not the world's archivist bravely saving copies of some shitty anime they printed a million copies of that you haven't watched in years, you're just a slob who can't take out the trash. And you pay for that having to buy slow bloated mechanical drives to house your shame rather than lean fast SSDs.
That particular 1TB WD10EZEX is solid, but the other Blues aren't 7200 RPM. Microcenter use to have them for $40 USD a year ago. I'm not sure that I would spend $55 for it. You can get 4TB Reds or HGST NAS for $100-$150.
Did a hard drive kill your mother or something
Any WD drive is generally as good as /better than other manufacturers
You're fucked. It's just a question of when with any drive really, but more so with those.
I've already got the "failed seagate drive" tshirt.
I've seen a WD drive outlive a Gigabyte motherboard, which was surprising. A Maxtor drive is half dead before you finish installing it.
MTBF isn't something that normal users can use MTBF is the total amount of time a drive can run 24/7 between failures. If you are restarting your computer or spinning down the drives MTBF does not, and should not, impact your buying decision.
could you go into more detail?
i have a 300GB maxtor diamondmax drive manufactured dec2004 and it still works lol
Chad coming through
if i cover that hole, will you die?
thats the official reason
the true reason is to make them fail after warranty period
the jews did same thing with computer monitors. even 2017 LCD monitors that cost $4000 are worse in most aspects than 10-15 year old good CRT.
sure, it's more noticeable because it will force you to delete 80% of your data to make it fit into SSD
ever heard of 2.5" hdds?
it's made to gas you in an emergency situation so you don't sue the vendor.
Someone's mom got raped by an SSD.
how are these compared to wd black?
Anyone know the expected lifetime of STT-MRAM cells?
They supposedly don't suffer from the degradation that makes current day NAND-based drives good for the economy, but I haven't been able to find any approximated failure rate comparisons to contemporary non-volatile memory tech.
They're rebranded ultrastars, which you can get for 50 dollars less.
Just set up a zfs pool for my backup server, it has three 1TB WD greens and one toshiba 1TB laptop small drive. It's pretty comfy first using it, I let zfs take all 8gb of RAM and see it run wild on the resources. The config is Raidz2 which means I get 1,7TB out of 3,7TB with 50% redundancy.
are there any practical benefits from RAID 0? I was considering it but if the load times aren't that much of an improvement i'll probably just pass on it. Sorry if this sounds like a dumb ass question, but i'm a dumb ass.
with LVM being a thing now, no
No. For the price of two HDs with shit reliability divided by two and a hardware RAID card to not fuck your bus bandwidth via fakeraid you could get a SSD of the same size or greater which would be much faster, more reliable, and use less power.
Really, there's almost no reason to buy a mechanical HD today and there's no innovation in the mechanical HD space other than attempting to graft small SSDs onto them to buy time.
Reliability is going to be worse than just divided by two
1. RAID cards aren't that expensive
2. buses are fast enough for multiple HDs
Cheap disk space. For some use cases, IOPS are irrelevant. There's no reason to store TBs of movies on SSD.
Isn't filling HDs with helium to fit in more platters innovation? Toshiba just announced a helium filled 14TB HD. With good old PMR, that is. SMR and HAMR will push the limit even further.
But RAID 0 on good old HDs makes no sense indeed.
Greater MTBF and double the load/unload cycles. Basically a more reliable black and often the same price.
The ones that aren't a scam get expensive. A basic battery backed controller (imo the bare minimum to not be a scam) starts at about the same price as a HD, and the modern flash-based ones are quite expensive (but overkill for what he wants).
It all depends on if he has other devices that would have wanted the bandwidth fakeraid will waste.
There's no reason to store TBs of movies at all. Is your brain defective and cannot remember things so you have to re-watch movies? Even if you need to because you're literally retarded, robotic tape arrays and streaming are a better match for this usage pattern. Various cloud providers let you use theirs, like Amazon Glacier, and are cheaper than maintaining your own HD array with the same durability.
That'd be neat and all if SSDs weren't up to 60TB and doubling yearly. Those are super expensive but not because the tech itself expensive, just because they can get away with it as datacenters are ravenously hungry for them.
I have one WD Red and one WD Blue sitting inside my computer. I'm happy with both of them. Got the Blue recently, the Red has been sitting around in my system much longer,
Build a raid 0 using raid 5/6 sub arrays.
Watch your write penalties nearly disappear, and enjoy being able to swap out smaller numbers of devices for leapfrogging increases of space.
You're better off getting an used LSI HBA, properly heat sinking it, and a UPS.
In the era of 6+ core processors with insane single threaded performance, hardware raid accelerators are pointless outside of very specialized situations where you're not allowed to use ZFS.
A child's toy for gentoo and gentoo accessories. Have fun losing all your shit to crashes and power failures.
If someone is doing anything other than raid1, then I agree there's a minor chance of a write-hole event, but in practice it's not a huge deal for home usage. If your raid system is crashing, it's an indication that you need to spend some time to get a stable fucking system, or stop using raid. The best course of action is to store your terabytes of animes on an entirely different computer from your desktop. With things like OpenMediaVault and other contenders make this super fucking easy, and the hardware they can run on is cheap.
Neither hardware nor software raid is guaranteed to survive a power failure without some sort of backup power supply.
If you're use raid, you get a UPS. Hardware level write back caching is nothing more than a tiny, targeted UPS.
And you are obviously just using hyperbole when suggesting destruction of a raid array would actually result in data loss, because after all we both know that RAID IS NOT A BACKUP, and everything should be backed up, Right? If data doesn't have backups, it should already be considered lost, right?
For a home or even small business user, rather than pretending to be an enterprise server administrator and spending money on a proprietary black box designed to lock you into an ecosystem, the money is better spent on more hard drives for backups and a fucking UPS.
Cheap raid cards and chips on cheap motherboards are FAKE-RAID
-They use the motherboard's CPU and ram to do calculations instead of their own.
-These cards are a pile of horrendous hacks thrown together by a ching chong chinaman looking for a quick buck.
-Testing, certification, documentation? Never heard of them.
-Generally lack a cache, and onboard battery backup, which really removes the whole point of these damn things. If a card doesn't have these things, just save yourself some trouble and go software raid with a UPS.
-Used to only do raid 0 or 1. Which was for the best, since you're shit out of luck if you want to recover from crash from trying to do something gay on these cards like 5/6/10.
-Fakeraid cards will sometime do really fucky things with hard drives, disabling various shit for god knows why.
They have every possible disadvantage, and a singular advantage: They are easier to boot from than software raid. Stay the fuck away.
Well, intel's motherboard raid shit is adequate and relatively standard. Again, don't be stupid and use backups and a UPS.
Another thing to note, is that most real hardware raid cards have not been designed to deal with SSD's, so software raid is preferred and often gives better performance. This may be changing but I haven't been paying attention, because thank goodness I don't need to anymore.
Modern RAID controllers only use battery to give them time to write the contents to flash. That includes when something like the computer's power supply blows up, the MB gets fried, etc.. A UPS isn't providing that level of safety and is usually a waste.
RAID is a type of redundancy with certain properties. So are 'backups'.