5 Reasons You Should buy an HDD Instead of NVMe! feat. Seagate Ironwolf Pro & Exos

[@sonjaudiovisuel3165]

I always use HDD for backup and longtime storage !

[@Riyozsu]

Until you realise that SSD will outlive hdds. I could fling an SSD and hdd across the room and the SSD will more likely survive.

[@sonjaudiovisuel3165]

@@Riyozsu yes of course, but I don"t throw my hdd. For travel etc I use SSD. But i've always keep copy on HDD in a room without mad thrower ! :D

[@SRSpawn]

I could store stuff on a HDD and not power it on for 5 to 10 years and all my data will still remain safely on it, same can't be said for flash media aka SSD

[@trevorgreen7324]

Right, let’s be honest. This is more a speed thing here. If you talking the most secure storage. Tape. Yes tape, that 80s marvel. Is far and away the most secure storage solution. Proven over decades. CDs and DVDs were meant to the future! Tape has outlasted them all.

[@quademasters249]

@@Riyozsu There's no reason to think an SSD will last longer than a hard drive. There's no reason to believe the data won't self-erase when stored unpowered for awhile. They're certainly more durable in operation but nobody really knows long term.

[@coisasnatv]

I use HDD's since the 90's, all my backups are stored in HDD's from the 90's and I also have backups of those HDD's in new HDD's drivers. My oldest hard drive is from 1994 and the newest is from 2015, they all still work. I don't care about NVMe or SSDs, all my main computers runs in RAID-0.

[@ianemery2925]

I only get rid of HDDs when the SD card of the same size, drops below £10.

[@surfin7]

I have raid-0 too, but the NVMEs are MUCH faster than that! Got 2 nvme´s and 4 hdd´s on my main machine.

[@chuckaeronut]

@@ianemery2925 This statement, while it makes sense on its face, is such a staggering technological flex that it makes me proud to live when we do.

[@MARProduction24434]

I have changed my hdd like 2-6 years because it keeps failing. I used it to store my games and keep it in my pc. Any idea of the cause or habit to have to keep them safe

[@ianemery2925]

@@MARProduction24434 What type of flooring is the PC stood on? HDDs dont like mechanical noise caused by bouncy wooden floorboards or panels; if it is on such a floor, try and move it somewhere that minimises the vibration; fit rubber anti-vibration mounts to the HDD; or perhaps stand the PC on a couple of carpet tiles (assuming it isnt bottom cooled). Shouting and screaming can also cause damage (seriously); so try and avoid that. Finally, fit extra RAM (16-32GB) and turn off the Windows "Page File", or set it to a static 1GB size; this is notorious for cache thrashing, which prematurely wears out both mechanical and solid state drives, and slows down your PC.

[@yumeN0dengon]

Quick correction before watching the rest of the video: HDDs *do* have a TBW rating. Or rather a DWPD, except it's annualized. Granted it's rarely (if ever) mentioned for low-end or midrange consumer drives, but it's in the spec sheet of Exos and IronWorlf Pro drives for sure (basically server and enterprise class models). If memory serves, older models are rated for 300TB/y, newer models get 550TB/y, and it's generally the same values for Seagate and HGST/WD drives. So if you want to stick to specs, you actually _can't_ write to them 24/7/365 @250MB/s because you're well past the annual workload they're rated for (and you couldn't do it anyway because that speed is _not_ the average speed when you fill the entire drive, which is lower). That being said, it's true HDDs don't have an actual, absolute TBW limit, contrary to NVMe drives. But then again, the TBW ratings of NVMe drives, aside from being generally so high that it's virtually infinite for all intents and purposes, rarely is an actual, hard limit (i.e. the drive will function just fine way longer than its rated TBW).

[@lukas_ls]

@@yumeN0dengon Well, about that: it proves hard drives to be much less endurable than NVMe SSDs. Even the best hard drives offer like 3PB of total workload (that’s both read and write). And hard drives tend to produce more errors over time. Even if it lasts 4x that in the real world (which it likely doesn’t), it’s still pathetically low compared to cheap Qlc SSDs. A 16TB (even smaller than the hard drives, so it’s at a disadvantage) solidigm nvme ssd for around $100 per 1TB (that’s quiet cheap for huge drives) has a TBW of at least 15PB in a worst case hammering scenario (you wouldn’t buy qlc for that) and 30PB in a more realistic, sequential workload. So even smaller Qlc drives outlive the best hard drives by a factor of 5-10 in their TBW spec. The best SSDs will do 60PBW, that’s 20-40x of what the best NAS HDDs are rated for.

[@lukas_ls]

@@yumeN0dengon btw. The WD Red pro is pretty bad in particular. It’s rated for 300TB per year at 20TB capacity. That’s 15 full reads/writes a year. When using in a RAID, it’s recommended to do scheduled scrubbing to ensure integrity. Recommendations are often between every 2 to 6 weeks. When doing a scrub, often the entire disk is read (depends on your setup, but at least all your data is read at least once). When scrubbing every 4 weeks (which is a usual amount), you’ll have 13 full drive reads per year just for scrubbing which is 260TB of the 300TB spec. So, realistically speaking, you can only do a couple of full drive reads/writes a year without exceeding the specification. Large hard drives are pretty much useless outside of cold backup storage. Reads and writes both lead to wear on the mechanical components and manufacturers failed to scale workload capacity with disk capacity. In SSDs it’s the other way around, more capacity means more endurance.

[@Jerrie-Lenore]

We wrote over 14 pb to a mirror pair of 4tb Seagate drives in a server over a few years. Try that with an ssd!

[@chuckthetekkie]

@@lukas_ls By that logic my 18TB Exos would have died a long time ago as it has read almost 17PB of data and written 243TB in 2 years.

[@lukas_ls]

@@chuckthetekkie what about ure rate? Did it go up? That’s just an anecdote and don’t tell the whole story

[@John_the_baptized]

Alright that intro got me in tears over here. That was beautiful

[@johnjlopez]

A raid mirror (Raid 1) does not double the speed. It doubles the data as a backup. If anything it's slower since it needs to write the same data to 2 drives simultaneously. A striped raid (raid 0) would increase the speed and data bandwidth but if either drive fails you lose all the data. If you need both performance and data reliability, you may want to go either raid 5 or 10.

[@alandab]

Exactly. I was scratching my head when he said that in the video.

[@frankwong9486]

Raid 1 technically increases Read IOPs if the raid controller do load balancing?

[@astralboy]

he clearly said raid1 for write will be slower, but not for read apparently

[@alandab]

@@astralboy ...and? Go on...repeat the rest that pertains to our conversation.

[@myne00]

It can improve read speeds. Theoretically double.

[@g6design367]

Back With The Intros 😂🔥 HDD for longterm backups💯

[@Rabahdu91]

Correction: raid 1 is only for copying and redundancy. It is raid 0 that allows fast writing and reading because it writes at the same time on both disks and it distributes data

[@Richo5566]

Yes. RAID 0 effectively doubles the throughput so if the HDDs can read/write at 300MB/s then this will jump to 600MB/s. A number which surpasses SATA SSD (non-raid).

[@deepaknanda1113]

​@@Richo5566may be only in theory. Using 2 hdd in raid 0 (striping) and doesnt get any significant speed improvement. But yes it writes simultaneously on both disk in raid 0.

[@surfin7]

@@deepaknanda1113 I still have raid-0 on hdd´s here, and yes, you have a significant speed improvement, but not the double, and for sure not even close to a sata ssd, in real world the raid 0 will give you a 250mb/s, still far from a SSD.

[@SpaceCadet4Jesus]

I'm more concerned with the safety of my data and my clients data. I NEVER run RAID 0, there is no benefit compared to the big trouble that can occur when only one of the drive decides to head in the south bound lane.

[@OriginalMergatroid]

Friends don't let friends use RAID 0.

[@EbonKim]

Only advantage of a HDD is space. If you're using a drive for storage, and not writing from it, but using it a lot for reads, then the NVMe will last for decades, whereas the HDD won't last even half that long. Even if the NVMe's write gets filled, you can still read from it. I have had no NVMe's go bad, but some SATA SSD'S have gone bad, especially from certain manufacturers, and many more HDD's have gone bad.

[@Sadler2010]

In the early years of SATA I had 3 drives from various manufacturers up and die... I own PATA drives that still function and those live in old DOS/Win98 PCs...

[@lukas_ls]

@@EbonKim given the live expectancy, reliability and integrity and capacity (SSDs come with higher capacity nowadays), SSDs are often more cost effective in the long run. Speed and efficiency isn’t even significant in that case. Do the math and find out how close they came in terms of long term cost.

[@Randomtechreviews2929]

And cost. With my current 120tb storage along with 100 tb of backup. Using pure NVME drives will be near the price of buying a car.

[@peterwstacey]

Hard Drives are super useful for long term data archives, i.e the kind where you put your backup in a fireproof safe. They do not need power to maintain data integrity (well, for decades anyway) whereas flash data does. But if you're that serious about backups, you would use tape.

[@richardp4841]

So for the non savvy people.. That means if i wanted to access stuff on the NVMe like look at photos or watch a film saved on there that would last a long time but if i was transferring photos and/or movies from my computers hard drive to the NVMe then it would die much quicker than a hard drive? "Read" meaning looking and accessing data between the two and "write" meaning transferring data between the two, have i understood that correctly?

[@ianemery2925]

Every single Seagate drive I have ever owned - going back to Win95; died within 5 years; and one that failed after 6 months, Seagate failed to replace under warranty, despite my getting an authorised RMA for it. Seagate will never get my business again. As for size; I just bought a 6 bay NVME NAS that is only slightly larger than 2 HDDs; it is perfect for home use, storing films and music to pipe around the house, with no worries about bouncy wooden floorboards causing heads to crash.

[@johnsmith-i5j7i]

Yeah they are crap

[@benmann1901]

I have a bunch of the eXos drives, most well over 5 years. They have been fantastic.

[@RobertHouse101]

Me too. I don't think I've had a HD last as long as 4 years. It just $ucking ups and dies.

[@stephen5224]

Oh you are so right!

[@InnerFire6213]

I have both wd and seagate drives that are 9 year old. The seagate is showing some error in smart reading while the wd is as good as new. Backblaze data checks out

[@VTOLfreak]

Best intro on this entire channel. F***ing hilarious. But I do need to correct you on one point: HDD's do have a rated workload limit, check the spec sheet. For both the Ironwolf Pro 24TB and Exos X24 24TB it's 550TB/year. Considering they come with a 5 year warranty, the expected lifetime is 2750TB. And this covers both read and write operations on HDD's unlike SSD's where only write operations are counted. If you really hammer these HDD's with 24TB a day like you mention in your video, from a reliability point they will be considered end of life after just 4 months. Many do last way beyond that as it's not the storage medium that degrades like with SSD's. But the mechanical moving parts like the actuator arm and heads do have a limited life span.

[@claudej8805]

He's very wrong, but you're wrong too. MTBF is 2.5 million hours = 285 years (?!) and 285*550=157000TB

[@claudej8805]

@kleanthisgroutides7100 individual components have far less ? you mean the HDD is not the sum of its parts ? I don't believe that. Theoretical and in the best conditions, yes I agree. But to me, MTBF of the whole HDD means all of its parts have a MTBF of at least that. But still, an exponential drop from 157000TB can still be a lot and I care about the temperature of my HDDs.

[@claudej8805]

@kleanthisgroutides7100 Sorry, I can't believe an HDD would show such an MTBF when one of its parts doesn't last that long, it doesn't add up. HDDs aren't exposed to high temps. Bell curve, ok, still the M in MTBF stands for mean, average.

[@claudej8805]

@kleanthisgroutides7100 We've got the most breakdowns at the start and at the end of the life of almost any product, so ? that doesn't negate the MTBF.

[@ColinDyckes]

A key point to bear in mind: Exos drives are supplied in bulk to OEMs and SIs and can't be warranted direct with Seagate but you must rely on the supplier. IronWolf Pro are classed as consumer drives and are warranted for 5 years direct by Seagate. I have both, but have just bought 5 new 16TB IronWolf Pros for a new Synology 1522Plus in RAID6. I've found both types extremely reliable.

[@johnsmith-i5j7i]

Seagate are trash

[@studydude]

HDDs are so needed and useful, Not all data access has to be NVME speed. The best use is a balance, I run (2) large HDDs paired with NVME and SSD allocating data to needed speeds of drives, For Ex, all my games are loaded on My SSDs and some on the NVME, while I have vast archives of data on the HDDs. It just works out. I will always have HDDs in my PC.

[@MeepMeep88]

There's only 1 main reason to get hdd over ssd. Larger capacity and/or cheaper

[@johnsmith-i5j7i]

Constant writing also

[@IdiawesKara]

no reason, just raid 0 good HDs and you have better performance for way less money

[@johnsmith-i5j7i]

@IdiawesKara raid 0 is dead. Solid state replaced need for raid 0

[@Wolfrich666]

on the contrary, the only reason i would want an SSD over a HDD is just speed, HDD are leagues more reliable than an SSD

[@johnsmith-i5j7i]

@Wolfrich666 yeah ideally have SSD and HDD. SSD for os and games, platter HDD for data backup, videos, movies, photos, game backup etc.

[@TazzSmk]

HDDs with such high capacity take very long time (days) to rebuild RAIDs, and also their speed drops a lot (up to 10x) once drives become filled and data fragmented,

[@andreabriganti5113]

Defragmentation is a thing and it's up to you to not actually fully fill the drives. It's basic knowledge that you should let from 15% up to 20% of empty space.

[@TazzSmk]

@@andreabriganti5113 indeed, but it's not a thing with SSDs, so buying 24TB HDD will give you "only" about 17TB "usable" space if I follow your 20% rule (which also is what Synology and others recommend)

[@dreamora1000]

@@TazzSmk It's actually a thing for SSDs as well and on SSDs it not about performance but about survival of the drive. Its called over-provisioning meaning you only allocate ~90-93% of your SSD to partitions. This ensures the TRIM operation and handling of discarded data and suboptimally distributed data does not create excess writes. Without this, you will need to be lucky if a heavily filled SSD survives 2-3 years because an SSD is in the end nothing but a RAID 0 with 8 / 16 drives (chips) and a hidden defragmentation process (TRIM) thats called the more often the more the disk is filled, which is quite bad given that SSDs are considerably more write limited than HDDs.

[@MrAlhaines]

I have two Pcie to m.2 with 1TB each. Your needs may differ. I use the drives as 1) Mint 22 boot drive 2) home 3) Debian 12 boot drive. I also have a 5TB HDD for TV shows and a 10 TB External for complete backup of E-Books; DVDs; music CDs and several backups.

[@mike13foxtrot79]

I have IDE HDD's and they still work after 20+ years. I just built 2 retro systems and the HDD's formatted and work fine. I Just grabbed a 2TB HHD on clearance from Staples for 24 bucks. Every built, 5 in the past 2 years, all have HDD's as storage. NVME as boot, SSD's to install and run. My "gaming rig" has a 256GB NVME windows boot drive, a separate SSD with Linux to dual boot. And a 2TB HDD storage drive, and a 4TB USB for backups.

[@dough.9241]

Seagate? No thanks. I’ve encountered too many Seagate HDD failures and expended too many hours recovering from them over the decades to allow me to ever overcome the negative vibe (even if some of their newer drives have improved in reliability).

[@Adesterr]

That's odd. I use seagate drives for over 20 years now and not one of them failed me. Granted, my sampling size is relative small, i bought 5 drives from seagate.

[@kigandachristopher8883]

​@@Adesterr yo just lucky.

[@SogMosee]

I bought 3 of the 24TB ironwolf and ALL 3 were DEAD ON ARRIVAL... im about ready to ditch seagate. This was my first time ever doing NAS

[@SpaceCadet4Jesus]

37+ years in computer building and IT support and I would NOT buy Seagate. Their drives from the past have given me and my clients so many butt puckering problems. Western D is almost as bad, and Hitachi wasn't too bad at all. Now I try to stick to SSD/NVMe and strictly use Crucial. Some Samsung solid states have bit the dust within 2-3 years on my rigs, not fun.

[@SogMosee]

@SpaceCadet4Jesus thank you finally I find someone that holds this opinion. Use SSD and sooooo many issues go away including noise, fragility, slow speeds. 8TB SSDs is plenty storage for a 5+ bay nas and I'm sure size will continue to increase over time

[@notsimar]

the Ironwolf pro harddrives do have a workload per year spec of 550/TB/year, the exos don't publish that number.

[@yumeN0dengon]

Exos are currently rated the same. It's in the product manual (see spec summary tables). I would've sworn it was also in the data sheets, but it's not.

[@Richo5566]

I’ve got a 16TB exos. It’s noisy and crunchy sounding but I know it’s durable!

[@markhovscrch4050]

So what is better? IronWolf Pro or EXOS? for gaming purpose please

[@ReceiveMusic]

​@@markhovscrch4050Iron Wolf is a lot more expensive than Exos for the same capacity. But Iron Wolf is also quieter than an Exos drive. I went with an Exos drive for my gaming pc cuz it's cheaper. I always wear headphones anyway.

[@Photonicpainter]

Actually I have experience with HVMEs and HDDs.Last helium filled HDD i using now hat constant transfer rate around 250mb/sec without any saturation slowdowns.Yes,its much slower for small files seek operations etc,but for large file transfers HDD way better than most nvme drives ,while last loose their speed dramatically while saturated.IMHO.

[@BenRook]

Yep, I still prefer the old-tech HDD in my devices where the r/w operations of spinning platters over 5 years >> ssd/nvme drives. I've only had 2-3 drives failures in over 3 decades of use. There's the use case for ssd/nvme over hdd, but HDD is still relevant technology even today. Cheers.

[@calholli]

Flash memory likes to forget when you leave it unplugged for years... So for true long term/ unplugged storage-- HDD is the way to go for sure.

[@C-M-E]

As per the usual, both have specific purposes with a few caveats. For me, 8TB WD hard drives are the backbone of my high res modeling 'collection', as after I finish a big project, everything goes over to LT storage and archiving on HDDs. The catch is that, while they are Tons cheaper for bulk storage, to keep them on the usable side for years and years, you have to spin them up once in a while. The older they get, the easier it is for them to freeze in place when not used. NVME has relatively limited storage, but it comes at you like a flood vs an ice cube melting vis-a-vis the HDD. Even if you're carefully collecting your data that you call for read cycles, they definitely have a limited speed lifecycle, where the more times you rewrite them, the NVME will Drastically drop performance over its life. They are better for writing to them and keeping the data for quick reads vs using them like most people do where data is constantly written, deleted and the space reused. After a year or two, their speed drops to half or less of 'new'/advertised. SATA SSDs naturally fall somewhere in between, while having none of the pros of either other than being overall faster than hard disks. Getting the half TB variety or so for dedicated OS use is a cheap way to go, however.

[@dikranpoladian4724]

For the storage server at my clients (video productions house) we run 30x 20TB Exos on 3 x 10 RaidZ2 Pool with 1TB of ram various SSDs for caching runs like a charm.

[@starman5754]

Gen 4 or greater, 2TB or greater Nvme for boot drive. Nvme drive(s) for project drive. Large capacity HDD(s) for backup, long term archive or general purpose temproary data dumping ground.

[@dafyddthomas7299]

Good Video OP - same as you - use HDD (high capacities 10 TB+) for archiving / storing long term Video, Images, music, etc but have SSD as O/S drives and work drives that can work on content / programs and then at end store images/ video/ music away to HDD drives

[@fatherof4kids]

I have been a computer tech since 1994 and I agree 100%.

[@WireHedd]

Using a quartet of 2.5" Seagate 5TB HDDs in a RAID as a Time Machine backup archive for my home network. Gives me about 14TB of Mac back ups overall which is perfect for my needs. The NAS on my Win10/11 systems is a bit bigger.

[@DreamstaAnkleBreaker]

only need em for gaming loading textures- big difference there, and faster booting and apps loading. but i use hdd for my movie servers and they work great and also for back up.

[@phillee2814]

Definitely a hybrid approach for me. Using ZFS set up a pool of HDDs in RAIDZ (or RAIDZ2 if I have more than 5 drives, going to RAIDZ3 for over 9) with NVMe as a cache for them (which is layer 2 cache, as system RAM provides the first layer) If I have 3 or more NVMe drives, they can also be structured as RAIDZ or just striped, as all data in the cache will very soon be on the spinning rust as well anyway, so losing the cache only costs speed. That gives the speed of NVMe with the capacity, fault-tolerance and long-term reliability of an array of spinning rust, whirling ironmongery, or however else one might describe it.

[@Cpt_Adama]

Both. In an UNRAID NAS use the ssd or nmve in a raid 0 config pool to move file temporarily into the NAS. Then the NAS then moves those files onto the hard drives which are in a fault tolerant Raid setup. This setup makes it a breeze to get files onto the NAS very quickly but still has the advantage of fault tolerance because of the hybrid setup.

[@TheCynysterMind]

I use HDD's in a RAID for storage. I find that those that really are concerned with Data protection (and almost no one is) Take your projects that you are actively working on... Copy the project to an internal NvMe drive. Separate from your OS drive. Conduct your work.....Then copy that project back to the RAID. This does a number of things. 1st allows you to take advantage of the high speeds for editing. 2nd allows you to edit without worry of damaging the original. Lastly, lets you wear out a drive unconnected to the operation of your computer (much easier to replace than the system drive)

[@websparrow]

We know, I have 4 4TB drives where I store everything. The nvme is for the software I run. Installation of windows is a few minutes while HDD takes a longer time.

[@sherrilltechnology]

Very interesting video for reals!! I use 4 4TB Seagate Iron Wolf drives in my NAS but in my computer I have a combination of an Intel Optane SSD 900P for Windows, I have a Samsung 990 Pro 1TB for Applications like VMware Workstation Pro, and a Samsung 980 Pro for games and things are very fast!! Great video!!

[@gamerdudegamerdude4961]

Data recovery too... You can go to a specialist data recovery technicians that can recover data from non working HDD while SSD's are usually 99.9% completely lost if it breaks.

[@DarcyAllenStrong]

This is perfect, these are the exact 2 drives I have been looking at for archive drives!

[@edwarddejong8025]

If you stick to Seagate's professional line you will have tremendous reliability. The Constellation, now Exos, are well made drives. The consumer stuff is not as good, and sadly people think that all Seagate's are the same. They are not. We have run our Constellations 24/7, and have almost 10 years on them now. We have about 100. Great drives. We use them in a Raid 60 (arrays of RAID 6) to protect the data. There was however, a bug in the original firmware and they would brick themselves after 50,000 operating hours, and when several drives failed in the span of a week i quickly checked their firmware notices and sure enough there was a notice that you needed to upgrade. So Seagate isn't perfect.

[@m.a6416]

For reliability: 1- WD Ultra star DC HC-5/6 2- Toshiba Enterprise capacity MG series 3- Seagate

[@Sheoloch]

Seagate no thanks. The others sure.

[@rogerhul1573]

Finally a coherent video, thank you very much for this wonderful video, HD is indeed very useful, especially for home users who store masses of files that are lost over time or even forgotten.

[@LaurenceBlunt]

I'm not going to watch this a second time, but unless I missed it, I did not hear any mention of drive technologies for either SSD or HDD. 1. Check for SSD's with TCL over QCL. When buying SSD the most reliable ones use TCL over the cheaper to produce but less reliable QCL. Basically the difference is if each memory cell tries to manage 3 (tri) or 4 (quad) bits each by using different charge levels, the more bits states the tighter/smaller the margin for errors is. I have not seen any single or dual bit SSD's for years now, so TLC is as good as it gets without buy mega expensive enterprise drives. 2. Check for HDD with CMR over SMR (if it does not say in the specification it is SMR) CMR disk use the traditional methods of writing data in tracks that DO NOT OVERLAP! This means they are both more reliable long term but are also much faster at writing data. SMR disks use a "shingled" method of writing that has all of the tracks slightly overlapping. The up side is cheap high capacity drives, but the downside is that they are less reliable over time as what would be minor loss of tollerances on a CMR drive can casue an SMR drive to fail or corrupt you data. CMR drive are faster when writing data as every track (ie: rings of data on the disk) is seperated by a tiny gap, so unless the drive is on its way out there it is one process. SMR drives write new data with part of ti overlapping the tracks inside and/or outside of that one, to avoide corrupting data the disk reads the data from those other two tracks, writes the new data and then has to re-read those other two tracks to look for data corruption. If the data has been corrupted it has to re-write that tracks data again, but also has to read more data before hand so as the check that that write operation did not corrupt even more data, etc.... This is why TWO drive with similar specifications and rated speeds will work vastly different in practice. Wher as a CMR drive like a Seagate Ironwolf drive can maintain write speeds of large files (small files are always slower due to a higher ratio of directory updates being required) will sustain around 200MB/s, but the SMR drive will mostly be in the low 100-130MB/s range. Also I would personally avoid the very large HDD unless you really need high density storage, such as needing vast amounts of data on a small number of disks. This is simply because if you have a failed disk drive a mostly full 8TB drive will take the best part of a day to restore that data. Doubling or tripling that time is a real pain. PS: Use hardware mirroring for security against hardware failures (ie: that both drives how a complete copy of data), it does not stop people deleting data they shouldn't have but that's why need real backups. Also I would NEVER recomend using disk striping of two drives as you have effectively just doubled your probable failure rate, as losing one drive brakes to whole set. Better to have two separate drives that are used for different uses.

[@MMOPC78]

Are "hybrid" HDDs still around? I have an older Seagate "hybrid" HDD that was just as faster as earlier SSDs at that time. At that point in time: a 2TB "hybrid" drive was like $80.00 while a 2TB SSD was almost triple that. Plus, those drives are now almost 6 years old and have shown no signs of failure. They don't 3ven have "head noise" yet.

[@Richo5566]

@@MMOPC78 yeah Seagate still make a few. It’s called the Seagate Firecuda SSHD in a 2TB capacity with an 8GB SSD used for frequently accessed data such as the boot files and the apps and games you use most. In my testing, Windows booted much quicker than a standard HDD but some apps had to be opened a few times before the drive put them in the SSD storage. They were also introduced at a time when large SSDs were expensive and having these provided a way of getting quicker boot times but still having lots of space of storage. This was handy in devices with space for only one drive such as laptops. Things are different now and large SSDs are much more reasonably priced so the need for these diminished.

[@4Nanook]

Unfortunately, the newer energy assisted drives that heat the media in some way to increase magnetic permeability in a local spot DO have a limit on how much you can write, just like an nvme.

[@wolfwilkopter2231]

In terms of price vs. capacity and also for long time storage, especially without power, there is still nothing better than a good HDD. And the latest NT001 and NT002 Series Ironwolf Pro are awesome, pretty quiet, very fast for HDDs and up to 24TB are a solid statement, not to mention the Data Rescue support for 3 years. I'm running 2 of them a 20TB NT001 and a slightly older (3-4years) 12TB model and i cant complain. Planning for a NAS/Home Server i will surely go with some NT001/2 models.

[@Sadler2010]

I have been doing an NVME for OS and general software and still use HDDs for games and bulk storage of files since my previous FX-8350 build(now I have a 5900X). I currently have a 1Tb NVME, a 3TB HDD and a 12TB HDD with plans to get a 2 or 4 TB NVME and then another large HDD to upgrade the 3TB one.

[@deniswauchope3788]

Good video! I'm old-school, it's been a long time since I built a computer but the time is now. There've been a lot of changes since my last build in 2012 (which is still going strong but getting long in the tooth. 😁) New MBs have M.2 slots, not so many HDD storage locations; I'm thinking of maybe 2 NVMEs for boot & games, then 2 HDDs for archive & general use. Looking forward to my new build, and my new case arrives Thursday, so it's ON BABY!

[@sandan500]

I have tried many of the backup software such as Acronis etc. They never work as advertised and recovery is very slow usually. My method which has worked well for me and much faster is to clone two SSDs exactly mirroring each other. When I get a glitch I just reboot, go to BIOS and move one of the other two system drives up to first boot and I am done. Then I just clone the corrupted drive again. I refresh the clones at least every month or if I have made many changes I do it sooner. This method is accurate, fast and dependable. I use all m.2 nvme or sata SSDs. This method is fool proof and has never failed me.

[@phillee2814]

Yet.

[@PC4USE1]

I installed an NMVE in my pc for boot up speed (Linux) and kept the original HD as a back up. I also back up any downloaded data from the NVME to a spinning hard drive.

[@leonidd00]

For OS partitions SSDs, for data storage HDDs. For my private filsharing server I recently configured teared storage, means using a smaller 30 GB SSD partition as caching for a larger main storage 1 TB HDD. Works great until now.

[@arampan]

I use both Mac and Windows for different projects. Can you recommend a direct connect thunderbolt or USB-C hardware raid case that can hold at least 4 drives?

[@FlyingFun.]

Primary reason i prefere nvme is noise, i simply cannot stand the hum/vibration that a hdd makes, unless i out it in a different building all together i am always aware of it no matter where i locate it, it just seems to get everywhere through walls etc and annoys me. Nvme get hot though and can hang for ages sometimes due to way they work, id prefere a slower nvne that stays cool and does not hang. Long term storage though hdd is best.

[@americathefree3708]

Already been planning to go HDD back ups for the home network.

[@reversicle212]

I don't plan on buying a NAS, should I still get NAS drives for my regular pc?

[@humphrey7680]

had a barracuda before, write speeds plummet to an unbearable level during game installation and updates. had an ironwolf and it fixed that issue. i now changed to an exos and its great albeit noisy

[@Dwayne_Green]

This is my favorite tech opening of all time! Hilarious, give your writers a raise!

[@rag_man673]

So I buy external HDDs to store movies and music on, but rarely do they live past a couple of years. They don't move, just sit on my desk until I need them and then plug them in to write or read. So I seriously considering an SSD. Storage until recent has been around 4T for movies and TV shows and 2T for music. I'm just sick of shelling out for HDDs every couple of years. I've had Seagate and WD.

[@nightadmin283]

I didn't use NAS HDD. Actually 2 of them in my NAS are just normal one from Seagate and WD and if I buy new one I will always buy from both 2 brands cause it easier to identify which one failing. For me my very first NVME SSD wasn't great at all. It fast indeed but it failed in one year then after claimed it it still failed in one year the same. My experience only improve when I buy WD Green and Black.

[@lukas_ls]

Reason 2 is just wrong. All HDDs have a so called workload rating that tells how much data can be written or read on/of the drive. A WD Red pro 20TB is only rated for 300TB per year over 5 years. That's worse than most TBW ratings.

[@squatch545]

True, I scratched my head at that one too.

[@valenrn8657]

For Model Number: WD201KFGX WD Red Pro NAS Hard Drive - 20TB, it's rated for 550 TB/year workloads and up to 2.5M hours MTBF.

[@lukas_ls]

@kleanthisgroutides7100 that doesn't make them better than ssds

[@valkaielod]

Hard drives do not have a defined workload from a technical perspective. The term was invented to deny warranty claims and artificially differentiate drives based on the market segment.

[@lukas_ls]

@@valkaielod they do. And that’s the same for TBW

[@nodewizard]

I thought about buying 24TB hard drives, but I found that 8TB SSDs (2.5", SATA drives) offer the best bang for the buck. They're lightweight and offer higher speeds than magnetic drives and come in pretty cheap. I have too many AI models, which adds up to disk space.

[@SalMightyOne]

Be honest you made this video just to show off those 24TB drives. 😂🤣😂🤣 Nah, just kidding. Keep up your great work mate! You are a very reliable source when it comes to hardware. 🙏🏻🙏🏻

[@bernards8050]

Please note: MTBF is not a promise or general expectation of effective life before a failure. MTBF is a calculation only based on the components ratings and the stress environment where the module is installed. It is not uncommon to have some kind of failure at 10-20% of the MTBF calculation with previous generation HDD's with MTBF's of 150k to 250k hours.. That is why there are many internal surveillance factors under SMART that are embedded in the HDD firmware. These would not be necessary if the MTFB was really a dependable value. Also, I think each system should be powered with a UPS. Nevertheless, for very large storage, this was an interesting video.

[@dmdnightfire]

you forgot for better archival and heavy use, avoid any drive that using shingled storage, like the cmr drives.

[@omnymisa]

With 2k_ definitively I would pick some HDD for archiving, and put one or tow not necessarily faster SSD in the middle in case I need a moment of buffing.

[@Ro7770]

Still waiting for the zen 5 productivity benchmarks.

[@mkaufer05]

SSD drives required they be supplied with power at least once every 8 months(maybe mine were cheaply made) or else the Data stored on can degrade, and that is from personal experience from not using them for 9 months at a time. But my external HDDs, after two years in storage I experience no lost of data at all when I connected it to my computer.

[@Cragfire]

What would I do? For massive long term storage where I'd only ever 'read' the files, go optical storage. Then do smaller mechanical raid for general storage that doesn't add up to too much. Imagine the time it will take to upload/download 70TB+ from a massive raid NAS/DAS drive? Several days if the drive is mechanical. It dose come down to use case. A nice USB4 NVMe raid is nice to work off of without too many worries or bottlenecks. Big project done? Burn to optical.

[@ryshask]

friends don't let friends buy seagate.

[@bgtubber]

While I still use hard drives for long term data storage an backups, the problem I have with them is their capacity increases with time and are pretty big nowadays - up to 24GB, but speed remains pretty much the same unless you do RAID. Speed just can't catch up with the increases in capacity. So it becomes increasingly slower working with files on an HDD as time goes by since file sizes also tend to increase with time now that we have fast multi-core CPUs and fast RAM to create and process them. So it becomes daunting to even use them for backup storage due to the long wait time to write all the terabytes of data on them. Not to mention the poor performance with lots of small files. Something needs to be done to get their speed a bit more in line with their capacity and I hope they are working on this aspect.

[@xponen]

in HDD they have 1 servos to read/write multiple disc, both front/back of the disc, so perhaps they should improve on this by having multiple servos to read/write multiple surface in parallel.

[@RealLordy]

Use a NVME caching layer in front of them and put the HDDs either in RAID1 or RAID5.

[@nicktayloriv310]

I use spinning disc HD's for storage and I'm old enough to remember when that's all we had and there was no such thing as a 1TB drive in a home PC. My home server and both NAS' are spinning disc. My home NAS running UNRAID has a M.2, a SSD and 10 HDD's. I went through the WD Red kerfuffle a couple years ago but I knew there was going to be a way around it. When I finish editing on my rig it's exported to two different storage sources off of my editing rig.

[@sa4555]

Not touching a Seagate with a ten foot pole. Every single drive that have ever failed on me had been a Seagate. Got several WDs/HGST and Toshiba drives been running well for over decade now.

[@MrPir84free]

There are other differences between the Exos and Ironwolf series drives too; like heat; I recently replaced a failed Ironwolf drive with an Exos drive ; it runs several degrees warmer than the other Ironwolf drives in the NAS. The drives are about 7 years old and have about 4 years of use on the drives. MTBF is largely hype in my opinion; 1 million hours MTBF equates to about 114 years;

[@walterdavis9718]

I have had great luck with the EXOs in my Unraid Server...One drive gave an issue and Seagate replaced it quickly.

[@tw350z7]

I guess I'll check around when Black Friday comes around to replace 5TB Toshiba drive in my Alienware Aurora R16. the Toshiba currently hosts as a Steam Games drive. I'm now wanting to consolidate Steam , Ubisoft and Epic games under one drive . in addition to the Toshiba ,I have 2 attached drives with more games . I want to get rid of attached drives in the coming future.

[@PawFromTheBroons]

I have had nothing but problems, with Seagate. It was a while ago, but since then I haven't dared to gamble my files on my NAS just to check if they've ever improved.

[@SimonWorlds]

Not to mention you are using 4x pci lanes for an NVME, a HDD uses DMI link through the PCH. Now with a 24lane CPU, you need 16x PCIE lanes for your 4090. You have only 2x NVME worth of lanes left. Large data transfers on NVME also creates a tonne of heat, I have seen some of the chips literally sweat goo from the NVME 😳 I still love my NAS HDD as my back ups. I just use 2x 6tb mirror for my needs.

[@molly_mallard]

I use disk drives for my NAS and NVR. NVME drives are used in my PCs for gaming and speed. Imagine the slow boot speed with a disk drive!

[@rogerhuston8287]

Get a NAS with both and use the NVMe drives for cache.

[@ogdan1173]

I use ssd only for the OS (linux mint), but the programs and files are located on hdd.

[@xjet]

You don't need a high TBW rating on a drive that's used for archiving... because a lot of the data on it will be written just once therefore (from that perspective) an MVMe drive is *better* suited to archiving than an HDD -- except "price".

[@phaikyouser9499]

An Nnvme drive is never suited for archiving, because if they get no power for 6+ months, all data will be lost.

[@xjet]

@@phaikyouser9499 No... the accepted storage lifetime of a modern NVMe drive left without power in an ambient temperature of 25 degrees C without power is 10 years or so.

[@RealLordy]

That is what you think. Read a bit on how data is organized across a RAID and what SSDs and NVMEs are doing in the background. On the disk itself data is continuously relocated. Ad RAID1 in the mix and there is a lot more writing going on than you realize. Use RAID5 and then keep an eye on the actual write counters. You would be surprised how consumer grade NVMEs wear out in a NAS system... You could reason: i switch it off. But then: what is the point in that case for having such an expensive flash only NAS?

[@ReceiveMusic]

I haven't seen a lot of videos on using Exos drives for gaming PCs. It all been reviews for Barracuda drives. Barracuda also only seems to go up to 14TB. I bought an Exos 24TB drive at $330 for Cyber Monday. I already have a gen4 Samsung 2tb ssd boot drive. I need it for Plex media and maybe some much older Steam games. Like for Cyberpunk, I know I'll keep on the SSD. But for ancient games like Arkham Asylum, I figure the load times will still be fine.

[@0nyxghost]

I just purchased 5 Seagate Ironwolf Pro16TB for a TrueNAS setup costing $1060 CDN.

[@Trifler500]

HDD's still work perfectly fine for strategy genre games, and really most non-FPS games.

[@Cemilaws]

Well, i had 4x 20tb X20 exos on my ds923+, its running without raid, but i have 2 nvme 250GB samsung ssds, for cache in raid 0 , i think its enough, i did think about doing raid 0 OR 1 for HDDs but even with my 10G isp speed you will not see any changes on your mobile phones photos app, or plex. 20tb was the price to performance best hdd 1 year ago, but now we have 24tb versions, iam waiting black friday to buy 24tb drives, already sold 2 of 4 hdds and 1 hdd on Unifi pro max, 1 left for my photos app and couple movies, plex waiting for the new storage :)

[@Richo5566]

@@Cemilaws did you lose much $ on the 20TB drives you sold?

[@Cemilaws]

@@Richo5566 i bought it for 325 euro shipping included and sold it for 285€ per hdd from 2nd hand market

[@Richo5566]

@@Cemilaws not too much loss then!

[@adoteq_]

I got 4* 16TB HDD from Toshiba 2 years ago. Now, 24TB?

[@duncancampbell9490]

I'm looking at U.2 or ( U.3 ) NVME drives @ £250 for 4TB - £500 for 8TB or £1000 for 16TB obviously plus a RAID controller ( U.3 probably + 8 TB U.3 SSD @ £600 - upgrade friendly ! )

[@RealLordy]

250 pound sterling for 4TB on a U2 drive? What brand/type? I am really interested here as that is a very good price point

[@eevd350z]

I've had 2 ironwolf pro 24tb's fail out of the box at work. 2 out of 4 working!!

[@aditfractale7991]

Sadly for modern gaming laptop hasn't sata interface anymore

[@LaserDiK]

Well not so long ago I bought 2x4TB HP 7.2k rpm SAS Premium drives for £40 each on eBay for My slowly building edit rig so I am very happy!

[@SpaceCadet4Jesus]

It's pretty obvious that a consumer NVMe normally won't outlast a commercial (Enterprise) NAS hard drive. The NVMe runs at a much higher temperature decreasing its life and has lower workload and MTBF ratings. Consumers usually just buy the cheapest drive.

[@winstonsmith1222]

I miss my UW SCSI with 10,000 RPM drives…. I Have always liked the Seagate drives. Currently I use a 2T NVMe with my MacBook pro b/c it is much more portable and does not require external power. On my desktop Mac, I have stuck to external HDD b/c you simply cannot beat the bang for the buck. And the data is recoverable in case of failure. The internal Mac storage is NVMe, which I use only for the OS and application storage. My photography and iTunes is kept on a Drobo RAID. Time machine is on its own external drive. I never buy a drive that is not capable of less than 7200 RPM, and I’ve noticed that faster drives are difficult to find these days. Thanks for the info on the differences in the Seagate line up

[@Terry-cw9ty]

Great video for both mediums of storage, I tend to use both nvme for high speed game access & HDD for music. How long can data remain intact on an NVME/SSD unconnected to a power source compared to a HDD?

[@ChikaHakozaki]

I run and own a gamestore and a vast majority of the consoles that come in for repairs the issues come from the seagate drive no ty if they are failing rapidly in these why I would I use them in anything else?

[@reverend11-dmeow89]

Data capacity stays the same as one drive for Mirror RAID, and does not double throughpout until one doubles that set again, RAID 0+1.

[@alpenfoxvideo7255]

I have a NAS with 4x 18tb Exos drives, but I turn it on only to archive my stuff as it's like having an expresso coffee machine perpetually brewing :')

[@lawrenceonface]

Ironwolf never disappointed me Using synlogy 1821+ 8 bays raid 6 plus 2 NVME raid 0 for random IPOS bundling 10 GB lan ，7200 ironwolf pro really for long term storage with huge TB and the speed really not bad and it and share multiple PC and notebook phone etc. ,and easy replace data for recovery data prevent loss ,main reason it really cheap per TB NVME just install 2 stick per PC is really enough Now I want a to upgrade 128 TB is also easy a upgraded per drive *one by one* each time while I need it

[@daisukesenpai8821]

Nvme yes for speed but I still use HDD as additional storage at the same time

[@freezee7547]

How about power efficiency and waste management?

[@Your32Maker]

5 yrs ago, I built my Z390 Aorus using Nvme 500gb m.2 drive, as for storage, I kept using my Raptors....

[@playeronthebeat]

Personally, I tend to use a tiered storage system in my NAS. I've got big HDDs running for archival purposes and backups. Standard SSDs for VM storage as well as hotter storage which doesn't need very fast access but shouldn't lie to waste on HDDs and I've got a small-ish NVMe RAID running that's for hot storage. However, due to the prices of SSDs in general, it's relatively expensive. I started out with just four 6TB HDDs which I recycled into my current NAS totalling my usable HDD storage space to 48TB with a 36TB + 12TB config). Most important data is then also backed up to the cloud (encrypted of course). Since that's a fraction of my overall space, I'm pretty comfortable about my data. Next stop is tape storage :D

[@rangergooseman]

I use SSD for my OS install and modern games, and use an HDD for my older games , because I like having all my games available on my system.

[@wayando]

After a failure, I have always managed to do a recovery from a HDD ... with SSD the data from broken chips is rather difficult to recover.

[@matejkotnik9675]

HDDs have about 550TB/year recomended workload not unlimited. Shingled drives tend to fail fast, cause of rewriting, conventional NAS rated are fine. In NAS the SSDs are good for RW CHACHE, the standalone SSDs are just too small for the price. I have 500Gig ssd knoking around in NAS that i rerely use.

[@razgrizadler]

I would only use Nvme M.2 SSD for OS and Gaming drive. Download and backup is for HDDs