16TB Seagate Expansion external hard drive $250

Notice: Page may contain affiliate links for which we may earn a small commission through services like Amazon Affiliates or Skimlinks.

newabc

Active Member
Jan 20, 2019
465
243
43
Newegg.com has 16TB Seagate Expansion external hard drive for $250/each after promo code, limit 3 per customer. It is a little bit less than the pervious 16TB WD external drive. It seems to be a "today only" promo.


Update: 5/17, newegg.com added another promo code which will expire on 5/19 at 11:59pm(PST).
6/1, newegg.com added another promo code again. I don't know when it will expire.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Samir

bilbo1337

Member
Sep 18, 2020
79
45
18
Florida
Does the externals work just as fast as the OEM ones? I know with the elements the speeds all seem to be around 200 MB/s, no matter the capacity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Samir

Samir

Post Liker and Deal Hunter Extraordinaire!
Jul 21, 2017
3,257
1,447
113
49
HSV and SFO
Does the externals work just as fast as the OEM ones? I know with the elements the speeds all seem to be around 200 MB/s, no matter the capacity.
I think the speeds limits are more due to the interface versus the drive itself.
 

Samir

Post Liker and Deal Hunter Extraordinaire!
Jul 21, 2017
3,257
1,447
113
49
HSV and SFO
these are most often exos inside.
Good to know! I wonder if these also would show a higher warranty duration when using the serial number of the drive itself. There was a time when the Exos drives inside the enclosures would have like a 2-3yr warranty while the usb drive warranty was only 1yr. So people would just shuck and use and have an extended warranty.
 

newabc

Active Member
Jan 20, 2019
465
243
43
I guess 8-12TB is probably an older generation Ironwolf and 16TB or above is probably exos, after I watched some youtube videos for the seagate expansion shucking instructions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Samir

newabc

Active Member
Jan 20, 2019
465
243
43
Got 1 of this.
Its SN and model number shows it is an Exos x18 16TB inside.
But the Seagate warranty check shows there is no warranty information in US for this SN.
The random write speed of "RND4K Q32T1" is 17.xx MB/s.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Samir

Samir

Post Liker and Deal Hunter Extraordinaire!
Jul 21, 2017
3,257
1,447
113
49
HSV and SFO
Got 1 of this.
Its SN and model number shows it is an Exos x18 16TB inside.
But the Seagate warranty check shows there is no warranty information in US for this SN.
The random write speed of "RND4K Q32T1" is 17.xx MB/s.
Thank you for the additional details. What did you use to test the write speed?
 

Samir

Post Liker and Deal Hunter Extraordinaire!
Jul 21, 2017
3,257
1,447
113
49
HSV and SFO
I would try using lan_speedtest or h2testw and see if they're any faster. I know crystal disk has a few different options so you can get different results depending on what the settings were.
 

newabc

Active Member
Jan 20, 2019
465
243
43
I would try using lan_speedtest or h2testw and see if they're any faster. I know crystal disk has a few different options so you can get different results depending on what the settings were.
Connected it to a Linux, formatted the partition as ext4 and tested with fio. The 1st test did with iodepth=64 and the 2nd one with iodepth=32 that is very close to CrystalDiskMark's result.

Bash:
sudo fio --randrepeat=1 --ioengine=libaio --direct=1 --gtod_reduce=1 --name=test --filename=test --bs=4k --iodepth=64 --size=4G --readwrite=randwrite ./
test: (g=0): rw=randwrite, bs=(R) 4096B-4096B, (W) 4096B-4096B, (T) 4096B-4096B, ioengine=libaio, iodepth=64
fio-3.23
Starting 1 process
test: Laying out IO file (1 file / 4096MiB)
Jobs: 1 (f=1): [w(1)][100.0%][w=10.9MiB/s][w=2799 IOPS][eta 00m:00s]
test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=4113: Wed May 25 20:00:57 2022
  write: IOPS=1874, BW=7497KiB/s (7677kB/s)(4096MiB/559454msec); 0 zone resets
   bw (  KiB/s): min=  464, max=26272, per=100.00%, avg=7507.96, stdev=2497.55, samples=1117
   iops        : min=  116, max= 6568, avg=1876.99, stdev=624.39, samples=1117
  cpu          : usr=0.59%, sys=3.50%, ctx=1010598, majf=0, minf=7
  IO depths    : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=0.1%, >=64=100.0%
     submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
     issued rwts: total=0,1048576,0,0 short=0,0,0,0 dropped=0,0,0,0
     latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64

Run status group 0 (all jobs):
  WRITE: bw=7497KiB/s (7677kB/s), 7497KiB/s-7497KiB/s (7677kB/s-7677kB/s), io=4096MiB (4295MB), run=559454-559454msec

Disk stats (read/write):
  sdf: ios=0/1056676, merge=0/220462, ticks=0/25605034, in_queue=25642658, util=100.00%

sudo fio --randrepeat=1 --ioengine=libaio --direct=1 --gtod_reduce=1 --name=test --filename=test --bs=4k --iodepth=32 --size=1G --readwrite=randwrite ./
test: (g=0): rw=randwrite, bs=(R) 4096B-4096B, (W) 4096B-4096B, (T) 4096B-4096B, ioengine=libaio, iodepth=32
fio-3.23
Starting 1 process
test: Laying out IO file (1 file / 1024MiB)
Jobs: 1 (f=1): [w(1)][100.0%][w=16.6MiB/s][w=4246 IOPS][eta 00m:00s]
test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=6007: Wed May 25 20:03:38 2022
  write: IOPS=4254, BW=16.6MiB/s (17.4MB/s)(1024MiB/61612msec); 0 zone resets
   bw (  KiB/s): min= 2688, max=25608, per=100.00%, avg=17040.91, stdev=3516.98, samples=123
   iops        : min=  672, max= 6402, avg=4260.23, stdev=879.24, samples=123
  cpu          : usr=1.65%, sys=6.53%, ctx=244825, majf=0, minf=6
  IO depths    : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=100.0%, >=64=0.0%
     submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.1%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
     issued rwts: total=0,262144,0,0 short=0,0,0,0 dropped=0,0,0,0
     latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=32

Run status group 0 (all jobs):
  WRITE: bw=16.6MiB/s (17.4MB/s), 16.6MiB/s-16.6MiB/s (17.4MB/s-17.4MB/s), io=1024MiB (1074MB), run=61612-61612msec

Disk stats (read/write):
  sdf: ios=0/261272, merge=0/6349, ticks=0/1930953, in_queue=1936241, util=99.93%
 
  • Like
Reactions: Samir

SPCRich

Active Member
Mar 16, 2017
256
137
43
42
Something is wrong. Those are basically usb 2.0 speeds.
the usb controller onboard is basically garbage. The WD easystore/elements are the same. When I plug them in and run badblocks, it takes 3-4x longer inside the case as shucked.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JoeSW

Samir

Post Liker and Deal Hunter Extraordinaire!
Jul 21, 2017
3,257
1,447
113
49
HSV and SFO
the usb controller onboard is basically garbage. The WD easystore/elements are the same. When I plug them in and run badblocks, it takes 3-4x longer inside the case as shucked.
I was under the impression that the speeds above were from the drive itself, and not using the enclosure, which would be even more bizarre.

I only purchased 2x 14TB easystores, but I remember running h2testw on them both and they averaged something like 130MB/s read/write each on an older HP 8760w connected via usb3. I've used the easystore enclosure for other drives and they've never had any speed issues.

If you're having speed issues on all usb drives, I would check your system drivers as there's something wrong. Even these on usb2.0 systems will max out the usb2.0 bandwidth so nearly 30MB/s r/w.
 

newabc

Active Member
Jan 20, 2019
465
243
43
Something is wrong. Those are basically usb 2.0 speeds.
All my posts are random write speeds which are supposed to be much lesser than the sequent write ones(250MB/s or above).

Below is from a report on a pair of Exos x18 18tb drives. My CrystalDiskMark and fio results is higher than the single drive one(13.99MB/s and 12.55 MB/s) but lower than the RAID0 one.
 

Samir

Post Liker and Deal Hunter Extraordinaire!
Jul 21, 2017
3,257
1,447
113
49
HSV and SFO
All my posts are random write speeds which are supposed to be much lesser than the sequent write ones(250MB/s or above).

Below is from a report on a pair of Exos x18 18tb drives. My CrystalDiskMark and fio results is higher than the single drive one(13.99MB/s and 12.55 MB/s) but lower than the RAID0 one.
So what's your point then? These drives are just doing the same that brand new ones do?
 

newabc

Active Member
Jan 20, 2019
465
243
43
So what's your point then? These drives are just doing the same that brand new ones do?
I think some people will like to see the random write speed other than the sequent read/write ones which are pretty pretty regular/normal in the enterprise mechanical drives. So I only posted the random write ones here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Samir

Samir

Post Liker and Deal Hunter Extraordinaire!
Jul 21, 2017
3,257
1,447
113
49
HSV and SFO
I think some people will like to see the random write speed other than the sequent read/write ones which are pretty pretty regular/normal in the enterprise mechanical drives. So I only posted the random write ones here.
I see. So just informational then. Is this basically the lower limit of their performance?