I didn't see a post on this. Backblaze reported their traditional failure rate analysis. Backblaze Drive Stats for 2022
Last edited:
Hard Drive Failure rates by Backblaze
- Thread starter Bert
- Start date
Notice: Page may contain affiliate links for which we may earn a small commission through services like Amazon Affiliates or Skimlinks.
This aligns well with my observation. I just had another seagate 3tb drive failure while running 24/7 under optimal conditions taking down the whole raid 0 array and not the first time.
I have yet to see a failure from HGST 2tb drives that I have over 6 years now.
Since my data is either not important or backed up heavily, price is more important for me but I wouldn't trust Seagate for critical scenarios.
I have yet to see a failure from HGST 2tb drives that I have over 6 years now.
Since my data is either not important or backed up heavily, price is more important for me but I wouldn't trust Seagate for critical scenarios.
It's been like that for years. HGST > WDC > Toshiba > Seagate.
Losing an array is still a nuissance. Recommended to put precious data on ZFS with RAIDZ1..3. Checksums everything (metadata+data), snapshots, compression, and monthly scrub will show defects in disks sometimes early. Use and test ZED daemon and e-mail notifications. Made available as open source for free from our paranoid friends, who also don't want to lose data. ;-)
Losing an array is still a nuissance. Recommended to put precious data on ZFS with RAIDZ1..3. Checksums everything (metadata+data), snapshots, compression, and monthly scrub will show defects in disks sometimes early. Use and test ZED daemon and e-mail notifications. Made available as open source for free from our paranoid friends, who also don't want to lose data. ;-)
HGST doesn't exist anymore - a shame. We won't get new disks from them anymore.
Hitachi and Toshiba still deliver great disks. Recently Toshiba been delivering interesting 512e (that can be formatted to 4kn) disks for good value.
But note its not that bad with Seagates, they've picken up slack since Constellations. I do consider some of their exos sas 4kn disks quite safe.
Hitachi and Toshiba still deliver great disks. Recently Toshiba been delivering interesting 512e (that can be formatted to 4kn) disks for good value.
But note its not that bad with Seagates, they've picken up slack since Constellations. I do consider some of their exos sas 4kn disks quite safe.
Drive businesses, like people, die two times: The first time when the business is bought or liquidated. The second time when it was the last time its name was spoken or written. If you compare WDC drives from 10 TB onward, you can see two distinct markers: 2.5M or 1M hours MTBF, and supporting secure erase or not. The former looks to me to be from the HGST plants. To me those are still "HGST" drives. They also idle 2W higher than pure-blood WDC drives.
For the homelabber anything below 0.5% annualized failure rate is very good. If you run 200 drives for a year, one will die. If you only run 20 drives, one dead drive every 10 years. I suspect I am missing some major non-linear factors here though. "Bathtub" curve could jump up after 10 years, simple because of wear on mechanics and aging PCB components.
Anyhow. Maybe I like HGST because I like good deals and shucked enterprise drives seem like a good deal to me.
For the homelabber anything below 0.5% annualized failure rate is very good. If you run 200 drives for a year, one will die. If you only run 20 drives, one dead drive every 10 years. I suspect I am missing some major non-linear factors here though. "Bathtub" curve could jump up after 10 years, simple because of wear on mechanics and aging PCB components.
Anyhow. Maybe I like HGST because I like good deals and shucked enterprise drives seem like a good deal to me.
Hitachi Global STorage doesn't exist anymore
Ima stick with Toshiba's MG series in that case. (Until they fail on me.)
There's been some rumors on how HGST used to run their own R&D slash QC unit in San Jose, no idea if there's any truth in that or did it survive the move under WD's umbrella. Was that the reason behing HGST making arguably the most reliable drives year after year? Who knows.
Also, who knows what kind of magic happened at Toshiba when they bought HGST's 3.5" HDD business in 2012, I haven't followed HDD market that closely but wasn't there striking similarities in certain Toshiba HDD's versus HGST in some models?
Also, who knows what kind of magic happened at Toshiba when they bought HGST's 3.5" HDD business in 2012, I haven't followed HDD market that closely but wasn't there striking similarities in certain Toshiba HDD's versus HGST in some models?
I think one has to understand what HGST is or how it became.
In itself Hitachi bought IBM's disk business; later WD bought Hitachi Disk business as well.
There was antitrust lawsuit (Not only from Chinese as commonly is written - but from US too) against WD that blocked them from integrating. As part of that deal assets/plants for production of 3.5" disks was in Toshiba hands. (while Toshiba old plant that was flooded was taken by WD)
Thus you had process from IBM, and their quality standards
Added Hitachi Disk division tech, and process
Adding WD tech, and process
and produced by Toshiba...
There was also something about Seagate there, but i can't recall i think they were forced to do some tech transfers at some point.
In itself Hitachi bought IBM's disk business; later WD bought Hitachi Disk business as well.
There was antitrust lawsuit (Not only from Chinese as commonly is written - but from US too) against WD that blocked them from integrating. As part of that deal assets/plants for production of 3.5" disks was in Toshiba hands. (while Toshiba old plant that was flooded was taken by WD)
Thus you had process from IBM, and their quality standards
Added Hitachi Disk division tech, and process
Adding WD tech, and process
and produced by Toshiba...
There was also something about Seagate there, but i can't recall i think they were forced to do some tech transfers at some point.
ibm hardware/tech is the best. Everyone knows that even tho they hate to admit that.
IBM is also behind almost every single computer related company; while even today holding serious sway in those companies even tho without obvious ties - i call it IBM Consortium.
(for ref/proofs of its existance - IBM saw AMD was in big trouble, so IBM offered AMD's CEO job to one of their engineers Lisa Su; similar stuff like that happened before, like tech transfers, people being hired, and so on, intel setting up glofo fab for ryzen.)
IBM is also behind almost every single computer related company; while even today holding serious sway in those companies even tho without obvious ties - i call it IBM Consortium.
(for ref/proofs of its existance - IBM saw AMD was in big trouble, so IBM offered AMD's CEO job to one of their engineers Lisa Su; similar stuff like that happened before, like tech transfers, people being hired, and so on, intel setting up glofo fab for ryzen.)