Best Hard-drives

Hitachi? Seagate? Toshiba?

Other urls found in this thread:

instagram.com/irenadrezi/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Id only buy toshiba out of those 3
And that only for external drives

Overall? 12TB helium filled WD / Seagate / HGST and SAS drives rather than SATA.

Do you need the best at home? No, you probably need a backup and just adequate space.

mommi milkies

I'd stick my hard in her drive.

yeah, I'm talking about external drives

cheers, hgst seems to have the lowest failure rate compared to others overall. ssd vs hd?

she thicc af

Captain "give her the D" Ahab, is it you?

>not liking high-test faux-ghetto bitches
never gonna make it

> cheers, hgst seems to have the lowest failure rate compared to others overall.
Again, not your ticket to data safety. You need redundancy / a backup.

It's inconvenient in a way, but that's just how the entire industry handles it, from small to big. There are no devices that are super super safe - you instead just have a copies.

> ssd vs hd?a
Probably HDD if you have to ask.

how many copies for the risks of losing data to be minimal?

>Probably HDD if you have to ask.
what's that supposed to mean?

i plan to make a new config soon, and i wanted to get a little ssd for the OS and a HD for the software/data/stuff
so maybe someone here can help me, i'm looking for a ssd that is affordable (i'm a poorfag) and that can last long, size don't matter much since i just plan to put an os on it
i've seen that corsair did some ssd, are these good?

>how many copies for the risks of losing data to be minimal?
Typically "the industry" has at least three drives / two data copies redundancy as a baseline even for bulk data.
[They're not exactly the same thing because they'll do erasure coded drive pools like with clouds or RAID6 where there's just two drives of space out of ten or whatever that are acting as redundancy so the array can tolerate up to two failures before data is affected on the third.]

At home (for data that isn't worth terribly much in your life) I would just suggest a baseline of main copy + periodic backup to another drive, it's usually enough.

If it's actually valuable data (a month's work, your cherished family photo collection, bitcoin wallets with $10+) a third copy won't be wrong either.

> what's that supposed to mean?
SSD still cost 5+ times as much per GB of storage, and HDD aren't really slow as compared to what most people do at home.

Unless you have performance reasons why you need one, you'll be better off with HDD.

> i'm looking for a ssd that is affordable (i'm a poorfag) and that can last long,
Generally they last longer than the warranty period, but how much longer in your case? You'll find out.
Nobody will compensate you for data loss and even the drive will only be replaced within the warranty period, obviously. So, same as for everyone: have a backup of everything you care about, from the start.

That said - Corsair are probably okay, sure.

fantastic, thank you

> bitcoin wallets with $10+
you know something the rest of us don't?

Western Digital...

> you know something the rest of us don't?
Nah, just a typo, I meant $10k+

I mean, it's fairly obvious that you wouldn't want to loose $10k+ or the only remaining video of your family because you were too cheap to buy another $5 microSD or $40 external drive or whatever you do (third copy for your most important data hasn't got to be the same size as for the less important data that you only have one backup of)

>I mean, it's fairly obvious that you wouldn't want to loose $10k+ or the only remaining video of your family because you were too cheap to buy another $5 microSD or $40 external drive or whatever you do (third copy for your most important data hasn't got to be the same size as for the less important data that you only have one backup of)
true. for me it's mostly just text files. probably best to actually print them on paper or repro on micro-film

You could do that, too. Paper is a good bit safer in many ways. Yea, it'll burn, and submerging it in moving dirty water is also bad news, but apart from that there are few random completely irrecoverable errors that can happen across whole cupboards of paper.

Then again, it also ends up needing way more storage space, can't be accessed and replicated as easily and so on. And with a single copy you still have some kind of chance that someone mishandles or looses it.

2-3 digital copies tend to be very sensible. You can have one copy automatically (backup or RAID1 runs all the time, occasional check if checksums match), another semi-automatically (connect drive and run backup+verification of backed up data in one go), and you'll be rather very safe against data loss.

Goddamn, who is she?

great info, thanks again

I got u senpai
instagram.com/irenadrezi/

probably hgst. i have one that has been running 24/7 for 4 years on a server and its still working.

those eyebrows are disgusting

Nothing special, I also had Seagates, WD and old Maxtors (even among those that had high failure rates overall) that did that.

But you might as well draw the one that fails in the nth year with n being lower than you expected. You just never know.

Yea, theoretically you could eventually get known rates of failure for older drives and, say, halve your chances of it happening within 5 years, but it's not going to be near zero either way.

I'd rather fuck a SSD, no robot
Without a use-case scenario the question is dull. Even the less reliable and slower disks may have a point in some JBOD configs, the most used in some "Cloud" offerings. OTOH if OOPS are crucial, you'd pick SSD or NVMe, especially if you're hosting 120+ VPS on a dedi (any RAID on HDD will be a bottleneck if those boxes are not idling). Some cheaper Toshiba are shite, some are good. Some older Seagate are awful, some newer are good. The memetic helium HDD is a meme and will lose its helium in 5 years max, while costing more than an intensive-use MLC aimed for the same life span.

Thick brows are patrician.

Not OP, I want to build a home NAS for some data hoarding type shit (mostly movies/games/some random large files). About 4TB capacity for now.

Would 2x4TB Toshiba drives in RAID1 be good enough?

Hitachi if you're not a poorfag and can afford to buy them new. Otherwise doesn't really matter

I avoid se**ate after that shit with hard drives failing left and right few years ago.

that's not thicc, that's fat

Stop posting fat ugly arabs. Thanks

>those lips
>those eyebrows
She looks weird af. Not saying I wouldn't dick still but...

low test cucks

I bet you let your skinnyfat girlfriends peg your assholes lmao

Hitachi

That girl is a fucking hambeast dude.
Without the makeup she would legitimately look like something that crawled out of a cave and screamed at the sun.

I've never had an issue with Hitachi. Been running them on multiple raid arrays for a decade with no issues or failures. Take my anecdotal evidence as you will.

thanks for your shitty opinion, dude

>hdd
>2017
lmao just use the cloud nigga

Avoid WD externals at ALL costs, especially those that include forced hardware encryption that fucking destroys all your data when the shit tier USB bridge fails.

He is right though, stop posting pigs

SAS has basically 0 benefit over SATA unless you're running 10k RPM drives.
Just get whatever is cheapest per gb and have backups. The only sense in having high performance high capacity drives as an individual is things like video editing or 3d modeling and most people don't do those things.

I only buy toshiba, whenever I tried another brand it makes weird sounds and eventually fails. I have never buyer another brand since then. Especially Western Digital and Seagate I have never get a funtional disk from those.

idk why, prob bad luck or those brand send the shitty ones to my country...

>literally handing your data over to skynet

>he fell for the high test meme

Does the brand of hdds really matter? The general rule is to back up important shit anyway, so as long as it's name-brand, it should be okay?
I've never understood the argument. It's different if it holds your OS obviously, but most should use ssds for that anyway.

so brands are really just a meme?!

>not uploading an encrypted container on a delta-sync-capable Cloud® and mount it locally

Proposal: replace v1 captchas with simple questions excerpted from man pages