Given that both of Toshiba’s rivals readily offer their highest capacity products in Europe, it is hard to imagine that there is no demand for 24TB NAS-oriented HDDs in the region.
I don’t look to buy Toshiba drives anyway, so moving on…
Hopefully your alternative isn’t Seagate.
Why is Seagate a problem in your opinion? I’ve been looking for NAS and it seems I’m still uneducated in that department.
Same reason the next person after them will say the same for WD, the next one Toshiba, the next one Hitachi.
Bad experiences sour your perception of a brand.
i would base my judging on backblaze spreadsheet, google it, its a cool site. i dont care about HDDs anymore, but Seagate there always has high failure rates.
tbf seagates do have a higher fail rate than the others.
mine is going strong for a decade now, but that doesn’t mean they are reliable as a brand.
deleted by creator
some companies that run datacenters punlish that data
Thanks for your comment, fair point!
In my case, because I watched that Louis Rossmann video where he said he basically has a business today because of all the failures of Seagate drives.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFscU8JUohA
There’s a benchmark, and Seagate is above all other brands on failure rate.
A good resource I’ve found is Backblaze’s drive statistics reports, as they report on failure rates and issues for all of their drives by specific model: https://www.backblaze.com/blog/category/cloud-storage/hard-drive-stats/
All manufacturers can and sometimes do make trash drives, and Seagate have a number of specific models that have very low fail rates. That said, they also have a larger number of drives with high failure rates than other manufacturers. Regardless, always research the specific drive model you are considering before purchasing to avoid surprises later.
Thanks for the link!
In my circles the unreliability of a Seagate Barracuda is a meme.
I’ve run a few of those for years without any issues!
Yea ok, that says it all :D
and not WD either
Gotta say, i’ve never had a seagate go bad. 2tb toshiba shat out in six months.
Why would you not want to sell things to people? I mean isn’t Toshiba a Japanese company? I understand why the Chinese are like that, but Toshiba?
… Let the free market decide? Wth 🤨
Keeping an eye on the 20TB+ pool. The 24TB Seagate (model ST24000NM002H) no longer has a perfect record, with eight failures for the quarter. Still, the drives put up a respectable 1.11% AFR. Meanwhile, the 20TB+ drives as a pool are averaging a 0.72% AFR, coming in lower than the overall failure rates—always a promising sign.
I have no trouble buying Seagate Exos, their stats look good so far.
Would you recommend Seagate? I’ve been trying to find out which NAS to buy and I have trouble doing so.
If you browse Backblaze statistics you will find that all brands are reliable nowadays. At least if you go for the datacentre brands (such as Seagate Exos).
Regarding NAS I historically enjoyed Synology but they’re currently aiming to start forcing you to pay 2x the normal amount to use their own branded drives.
Personally I built a Debian m-itx server for my fileserver (and other server) needs.edit: 2024 stats
Thanks for the resources and info, good to know :)
About 6 drives in my NAS are Seagate, but they are specifically models I found Backblaze reported as reliable. I wouldn’t have an issue recommending a good, new Seagate drive, as long as it has an acceptably low failure rate.
Thanks for commenting, 6 drives is definitely a good sign!
I find 22T to be perfect. When formatted it is just a little over 20T making a satisfying total size round number.
It’s not formatting losses. It’s different units.
22TB = 20.009 TiB
Long ago, storage manufacturers stopped selling their drives in sizes based on powers of two, and started using powers of ten because it makes the drives sound larger.
The argument was that SI prefixes denote power of ten and so therefore it was a correction despite decades of computing history using powers of 2 for storage. As a result the KiB, MiB, GiB, etc were brought in to denote power of two based sizes.
Note that 64GB of RAM is still 64×2³⁰ bytes of RAM which kinda blows that argument out of the water.
Iso recognizes with no i as base 2 for all memory including hdd. You can also put a disclaimer that the stupid unit with an i is actually in based 10 in the EU and U.S.
I’m legitimately a weirdo and only like my drive capacities to be in base 2; 2TB > 4 TB > 8TB > 16TB… I god I be waiting a long time before my next wholesale NAS upgrade!
Oh yes I know this feeling. Even building new VM template it was always a ^2 disk size.
Toshiba drives are trash anyway.
