2 ms·
> The power bill savings aren't worth the decreased hardware life. For consumer usage I find this hard to believe. I only use my laptop/desktop's spinning disk
by paulryanrogers 4y ago
> The power bill savings aren't worth the decreased hardware life.
For consumer usage I find this hard to believe. I only use my laptop/desktop's spinning disks like 2h a day at most. Then there are hybrid disks or systems that are likely sleeping the disks when use is infrequent.
- Dalewyn 4y agoLet me put it this way: I have a ~12 year old (110,651 power on hours), 500GB PATA Maxtor/Seagate HDD with 135 power cycles. It's still alive and kicking ass as we speak.
- IIsi50MHz 4y agoHmm, I think we need more evidence to decide which tradeoffs we're making. I have four 1990s drives with thousands of power cycles, still fully functional. And one more from the same time period that failed about 8 years ago. (( Why do I have these? Well, because they're SCSI or SCSI II, which the hosts support. And because I've not bothered to replace the drives with solid-state hacks that put SD cards on the same interface. ))
- justsomehnguy 4y agoIn my life life of L1 tech I had replaced too many HDDs to count. Sure, the main problem was the subpar PSUs, but are you sure what your PSU is enough?
- Someone 4y agoI don’t see how that addresses the claim “The power bill savings aren't worth the decreased hardware life.” It might even be the case that, if you bought a replacement six years ago and kept that powered on 24/7, you would have ended up paying less in (hardware+power).
- Dalewyn 4y agoYeah, but it's one more hard drive in the trash. Besides, it's not this hard drive anyway. At this point I want to see how long this wizard of a hard drive will keep running.