3 ms·

Anecdotally, as well as supported by Backblaze, Seagate drives fail more often than WD. https://www.backblaze.com/blog/backblaze-hard-drive-stats-q1-2020/ http

by dannyw 6y ago

Anecdotally, as well as supported by Backblaze, Seagate drives fail more often than WD. https://www.backblaze.com/blog/backblaze-hard-drive-stats-q1-2020/ https://www.backblaze.com/blog/backblaze-hard-drive-stats-q1... I’ve had one Seagate drive fail, and another that would actually return corrupt data even immediately after being written. Thankfully I have ZFS which is how I noticed it in the first place. I’ve owned more WD drives for longer and I’ve actually never had one fail; at least before they store so little I graveyard them.

lukevp 6y ago
Same experience here, only seagate drive failures over the past 15 years of owning maybe 30 drives total. WD has never failed. Obviously anecdotal.
Mindless2112 6y ago
My own anecdote is about the same, except in my ZFS-based NAS, I've had one WD drive fail. It was a WD Green though, so no surprise.
FabHK 6y ago
The way I read the Backblaze stats is opposite - could you clarify? * most reliable are HGST drives (model number starts with H, formerly Hitachi, such as DeskStar, UltraStar, etc., now under the WD brand), sub 1% AFR; * then Seagate (model number starts with S), still pretty reliable at around 1% AFR, with a few exceptions; * while the original WD (model number starts with W, such as WD RED etc.) drives are quite terrible with AFR from 2% to 5%. (I'm looking mostly on the long term statistics, spanning at least a year, and older stats regarding WD drives, as they don't use them anymore.)