The world's most reliable hard drives

My experience is very different than this report, I have brought 5 seagate drives periodically in the past 10 years, 2 failed in less than 2 years, in my experience, WD was actually more reliable since the 3 WD drive I got are all still working fine after 5 years.

What are you peeps experiences? Not sure if I was just that unlucky with Seagate or if their reliability improved in the recent years.
 
Have old Toshiba and HGST drives over here going strong.
 
kota said:
My experience is very different than this report, I have brought 5 seagate drives periodically in the past 10 years, 2 failed in less than 2 years, in my experience, WD was actually more reliable since the 3 WD drive I got are all still working fine after 5 years.

What are you peeps experiences? Not sure if I was just that unlucky with Seagate or if their reliability improved in the recent years.
Click to expand...
Did I read the article incorrectly? It still (for the last ~7 years) shows that Seagate holds the highest failure rates and HGST / Toshiba the most resilient.

Also yeah, same experience. I've had 4 Seagate drives fail over the last 8 years and none of my WD or Toshiba's have yet. My record still stands for a 2005 Hitachi 160GB disk that still spins smoothly with only 6 bad sectors! That brand was absolutely golden for longevity.
 
Dan C said:
There is no such thing as 'most reliable hard drive'. Any brand can fail at any given time.
Click to expand...

This. The article means nothing.

You can have two of the exact same drives from the same manufacturer, one serial number apart. One could fail in a year, and the other could last decades.
 
Crumbl0x said:
Did I read the article incorrectly? It still (for the last ~7 years) shows that Seagate holds the highest failure rates and HGST / Toshiba the most resilient.

Also yeah, same experience. I've had 4 Seagate drives fail over the last 8 years and none of my WD or Toshiba's have yet. My record still stands for a 2005 Hitachi 160GB disk that still spins smoothly with only 6 bad sectors! That brand was absolutely golden for longevity.
Click to expand...
You read correctly, it's just that I never had any Toshiba or Hitachi drives, so I was only comparing my WD with Seagate experiences, and was just surprise that the article rated Seagate higher than WD, glad to know that it wasn't just me, will keep staying away from Seagate for now. And probably look at buying Toshiba or HGST drives next, you guys also just buy it from Takealot or something?
 
kota said:
You read correctly, it's just that I never had any Toshiba or Hitachi drives, so I was only comparing my WD with Seagate experiences, and was just surprise that the article rated Seagate higher than WD, glad to know that it wasn't just me, will keep staying away from Seagate for now. And probably look at buying Toshiba or HGST drives next, you guys also just buy it from Takealot or something?
Click to expand...
Well if I read those stats correctly it places WD above Seagate. Seagate is down right abysmal. Also each category have their own failure rates and it seems to still hold true to only go for multiples, that is 2,4,8 and 16 and perhaps 12.
 
Swa said:
Well if I read those stats correctly it places WD above Seagate. Seagate is down right abysmal. Also each category have their own failure rates and it seems to still hold true to only go for multiples, that is 2,4,8 and 16 and perhaps 12.
Click to expand...
I think you guys are right, I was the one that read it incorrectly, I thought the WD drives didn't even make the list on the 4-12TB range, but actually it seems like blackblaze didn't use WD drives for their study in those range for some reason! :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter