Newegg(US) - Seagate Barracuda 24TB $250!!
- Thread starter TheTamago
- Start date
Notice: Page may contain affiliate links for which we may earn a small commission through services like Amazon Affiliates or Skimlinks.
Been this price a bunch of times this year, it's slower than any of the other lines of this size and by the spec sheet it's rated for only 190MB/sec, ~100 days a year and 120TB/writes a year.
I'm not sure if Seagate would void a warranty if you go over that, but it's important to note how these differ than the Exos series in case they do.
I'm not sure if Seagate would void a warranty if you go over that, but it's important to note how these differ than the Exos series in case they do.
I once made a mistake of running consumer-grade spinners in a NAS. This is when I learned why it's worth spending a bit more on NAS-grade drives. Mind you, there were ~16 drives in the enclosure, but still.
Thankfully I had a good warranty, but the company which sold it to me probably did not appreciate this sale.
EDIT: They ran fine for a couple of years, and then almost all of them died in a span of about half a year.
Thankfully I had a good warranty, but the company which sold it to me probably did not appreciate this sale.
EDIT: They ran fine for a couple of years, and then almost all of them died in a span of about half a year.
Last edited:
There was a similar deal on slickdeals on an external usb that had a mix of exos and barracudas. The people with barracudas had far worse performance than the exos ones, probably due to the shingled recording so writes got as bad as 50MB/sec even for bulk transfers.
So I'd almost treat this as a drive good for 'write once, read many' (WORM) type applications.
Not a bad deal price wise at $10.4167/TB, but gotta watch what you are getting for your money.
So I'd almost treat this as a drive good for 'write once, read many' (WORM) type applications.
Not a bad deal price wise at $10.4167/TB, but gotta watch what you are getting for your money.
In this case, though, the drive is CMR, so it shouldn't be horrible.
A high quality enterprise spinner gives about 130 to 250 (inside to outside tracks) MB/sec. If this drive averages even 130, most people would be fine with it.
They might be fine with the speed, but these drives can't handle 24/7/365 usage. One of our clients put some Barracudas in their NAS and they were dead in under 6 months.
I cannot speak about this specific model but in the past (8..12TB sizes) Barracuda closely matched reliability of Exos.
See for example stats for ST8000DM002 vs ST8000NM* in recent Backblaze report:
www.backblaze.com
Backblaze did switch lately to buy only Exos (when Seagate), though given their shucking history i suspect they're not paying much extra if at all for that (vs Barracuda).
I think choosing right vendor has more profound effect on reliability than difference between enterprise and desktop drive models (talking SATA/capacity drives here).
Myself - I no longer have any Seagate drives. They had a number of models with dramatically high failure rates (AFR 5-8-12%); (i've lost 4 of the famous ST3000DM001 within a year); HGST/WDC and even Toshiba do not come close, usually fluctuating under 1%.
See for example stats for ST8000DM002 vs ST8000NM* in recent Backblaze report:
Backblaze Drive Stats for 2024
The 2024 Year End Drive Stats Report is here. See the the latest annualized failure rates and data insights for the Backblaze drive fleet.
www.backblaze.com
Backblaze did switch lately to buy only Exos (when Seagate), though given their shucking history i suspect they're not paying much extra if at all for that (vs Barracuda).
I think choosing right vendor has more profound effect on reliability than difference between enterprise and desktop drive models (talking SATA/capacity drives here).
Myself - I no longer have any Seagate drives. They had a number of models with dramatically high failure rates (AFR 5-8-12%); (i've lost 4 of the famous ST3000DM001 within a year); HGST/WDC and even Toshiba do not come close, usually fluctuating under 1%.
Backblaze is slowly learning what the entire industry already knows--enterprise stuff is far more reliable than consumer. Over the various generations of their storage pods they've been moving more and more towards enterprise gear, first on the controllers and now on drives. I think their experiment is a bust in reality just showing that if you want real reliability it is with SAS and enterprise level drives and related hardware. In another decade I'm sure they'll come to the same conclusion, lol.I cannot speak about this specific model but in the past (8..12TB sizes) Barracuda closely matched reliability of Exos.
See for example stats for ST8000DM002 vs ST8000NM* in recent Backblaze report:
Backblaze Drive Stats for 2024
The 2024 Year End Drive Stats Report is here. See the the latest annualized failure rates and data insights for the Backblaze drive fleet.
Backblaze did switch lately to buy only Exos (when Seagate), though given their shucking history i suspect they're not paying much extra if at all for that (vs Barracuda).
I think choosing right vendor has more profound effect on reliability than difference between enterprise and desktop drive models (talking SATA/capacity drives here).
Myself - I no longer have any Seagate drives. They had a number of models with dramatically high failure rates (AFR 5-8-12%); (i've lost 4 of the famous ST3000DM001 within a year); HGST/WDC and even Toshiba do not come close, usually fluctuating under 1%.
As far as vendors for drives, if you're talking about who you buy drives from, I would agree there, but if you are talking about brand of drive, I have to disagree as all of my sata Exos, HGST/WD, and Toshibas are in the same boat. I think buying the right 'class' of drive is far more important than brand. If you stick a desktop drive in a server, you'll be in a world of failures at full load, and an enterprise drive in a desktop will be reliability heaven. And just the simple move to SAS just changes the game as those drives are tremendously reliable, even after 60k poh in a data center--hence why they show up in such quantities. Those little 2.5" 300GB and 600GB SAS drives of yesteryear are so unbelievably bulletproof compared to any 2.5" sata drive.
If a drive is delivered with SAS or SATA interface does nothing towards its reliability or expected lifespan tho.
Yeah pretty much all the tempting storage nodes coming out of scale deployments are SATA only now.
Its a shame SATA is not cheaper in the open 2nd hand market.
Last edited:
I bought two, not for 24/7 use or really in a NAS (I just ... manually mirror everything once in a while, it doesn't take that long) They'll be effectively media storage, write very-few-times, read many. I'll report back how they do but this price is too cheap to pass up with recent rumblings in the storage industry and their price adjustments to recent geopolitical changes. Less than $11/tb with 2 year warranty on NEW drives, not ones with 10,000 hours+ from serverpartdeals, sign me up. New drives over used anytime.
I have a couple other Barracudas in my collection, a couple 8TBs, they are at nearly 20,000 power-on-hours with no issues, though this is just an anecdote. Beyond the CMR/SMR differences I really question how much is marketing and how much is actual technical differences between the "enterprise" and "consumer" lines of spinning rust. We already know they are (or used to) purposefully mislabel 7200 rpm drives as 5400 to have one fewer production line.
I have a couple other Barracudas in my collection, a couple 8TBs, they are at nearly 20,000 power-on-hours with no issues, though this is just an anecdote. Beyond the CMR/SMR differences I really question how much is marketing and how much is actual technical differences between the "enterprise" and "consumer" lines of spinning rust. We already know they are (or used to) purposefully mislabel 7200 rpm drives as 5400 to have one fewer production line.
It shouldn't, but ime it does. And I've got such a cross section of different applications that it could only be the difference in drive quality.
The easy way to find out is to push 2x drives, one of each, to a duty cycle 2-3x its rated capability--the weak ones will fall out early and the lesser quality ones will show later.
I was more talking about facts and reality tho, not your feelings that are not based in either of them.
But its not like you are alone in this.
There are some facinating splits like this between enthusiast and "real world" enviroments.
Where what is acceptable to use in enterprise enviroments without any concern is beneath what some enthusiasts deem acceptable.
You would have been correct to a degree 10-15 years ago, then the sas and sata drives would be from seperate production lines.
But for quiet some years now its the same drives that are used for both, there is no seperation before the controller pcb goes on interface its sold with.
sas usage when the failure domain is at node/rack/row type scale has dropped like a brick.
The world has moved forward, but parts of the enthusiast community like you has not.
Last edited:
That's facts for me. And you can take your feelings on the matter elsewhere if you want to have that attitude.
Yes there are--headphones are a perfect genre for that.
Not to a degree, but correct period when drives were more distinct into 'consumer' and 'business' categories. The reality is that it still happens, just more subtle in terms of sas/sata. If the drives are so much the same, why is the power spec for sas different? If it's the same drive motor and hardware...
Homelabbers may have moved to sata, but true enterprise is still sas. It's why vendors mainly ship with sas with sata as an option, not the other way around.
They are the same upto controller board with its interface/protocol is added, the sas one typically uses around 3w more.
That is partly why sas is increasingly dropped for scale deployments by those fortune 500 homelabbers, its a added 45-60w per node along with higher node cost.
Both the direct hardware cost and power cost adds up.
The storage nodes im using in lab now is only available as sata, they were fairly cheap since a homelabber using sata for their main storage replaced about half a mill of them.
Unfortunately this claim is useless. Barracudas and Barracudas can be drastically different.
For example, the Barracuda 8TB and Barracuda 24TB share nothing but the green Barracuda label. They were made from different assembly line using different technologies and different parts. The former is an archive grade air filled SMR drive rebranding to Barracuda, the latter is an enterprise grade helium filled HAMR drive rebranding to Barracuda.
The Barracuda model your client was using might be garbage, but that doesn't mean all Barracudas are.