3 ms·

I'm interested in failure rate per iops. If the drive fails infrequently, great, but if it's also the worst performing drive, screw that. Would rather buy drive

• walrus01 8y ago
  In my recent experience there is not a lot of speed difference anymore between multiple manufacturers' 6TB to 12TB sized hard drives, when comparing between two competing products in the same rpm class (5400 or 7200) and areal density. Assuming similarly sized RAM cache on drive and not something like a drive with 64GB of SSD cache (hybrid drive).
  • loeg 8y ago
    To put it another way, everyone's pushing up against the same physical limits of spinning rust.
  • peterwwillis 8y ago
    I mean more like benchmarked performance. Two drives with the same specs may end up performing differently. I realize benchmarks are not entirely realistic and tuning can affect the outcome, but if there's a clearly outsized performance difference between two seemingly equivalent products, I want the one that performs better and fails the least. So, aggregate random read and write operations per second over failure rate, as a general spec. (this might also expose flaws in the stats, if one drive model is getting predominately more of a certain operation which results in more failures)