![]() ![]() Those are the issues I would consider but I would never ever use these drives for a commercial application.įrom what I can tell and remember the duty cycle documentation that Seagate and HGST have is reasonably new news. For a home system – which is generally running a lower performance file system and a single application – the data rates listed are all reasonable. The performance range for the vendors for MB/sec is about the same except for Toshiba, which did not provide any data. Are you going to hit the write performance issues? That would be the big question that I would need to answer.Ĭlearly you are going to be outside the vendor specification for the HGST and Seagate drives using them in a commercial backup application. The issues that I would consider for a home drive are: how will you be using it. I guess being third requires you to try harder. For the home user this does not matter much.Ĥ. Warranties are much less than for enterprise drives for 3 of the 4 vendors, with Toshiba being the exception. This is another area that will not likely impact the home user but tells me that the drives are not designed for enterprise applications.Ģ. The drives are designed to operate between (55C) 131F and (60C) 140F at the upper range, which is again fine for the home users and is similar to what is found for enterprise drives.ģ. There is not much information on seek latency for these hard drives, but there never has been much data. Areas to Considerġ. The hard error rate for all of these hard drives is 1 sector in 10E14 bits read. The only thing I could think of to challenge a home system is video surveillance. But I would find it pretty difficult for a home user to exceed these values. Using these drives at home is likely fine unless you are doing lots of video editing or similar workflow, in which case it is likely that you will exceed these values. I am sure that both hard drives have counters which can tell you how much data has been transferred. 12% of the year at 104 hours running at full rate of the drive, while the HGST comes to 4.57% utilization of the year at 400 hours. So what does all of this information tell us about consumer hard drives? I find it very interesting that both HGST and Seagate list an average rate of I/O for a year. ****Note WD40EFRX (AKA Caviar Red) lists 1M hours but this is a different drive. ***MegaScale DC addresses low application workloads that operate within 180TB per year. ** Cannot determine as you have to put details about the customer or drive in to get details. ![]() This is especially true when comparing consumer drives to enterprise drives. In the first part of this article, I’ll cover consumer and 4 TB enterprise drives and, later in this article, I’ll look at 2.5 inch 15K RPM drives and SSDs. (And as a reminder, HGST has been purchased by WD.)Ĭonsumer Drives The first thing you will notice with consumer hard drives is that for many vendors there is a lack of documentation details like MTBF (mean time before failure) or MTTF (mean time to failure). I spent a fair amount of time looking around each vendor’s the web sites as best as I could for the most detailed document available.ĭocumentation from Seagate was the best, followed very closely by HGST, with WD far behind and Toshiba even farther behind. I chose the latest drive for each vendor as of January 31 2014, and collected all of the information from the each of the vendor’s web sites. Seagate-Consumer, enterprise 4 TB, enterprise 2.5 inch 15K RPM and enterprise SSD. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |