[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

[going OT]Re: 2TB USB hard drive for backing up

On 24/04/2012 04:02, Philipp Schneider wrote:
On Sat, 21 Apr 2012 21:50:02 +0200, tv.debian@googlemail.com wrote:

Hi, I use seagate's ST2000DL003-9VT1 (it's some kind of "eco" drive, but
still fast) for that purpose, in raid1. No complains. I have had
disastrous experiences with WD 2TB drives (those "green" monstrosity). I
use gpt partition table, with LUKS and RAID without trouble.

What kind of disastrous experiences did you have with the WD drives?

I was a happy WD user with their "caviar black" line, until I started getting drives which where either faulty "out of the box" or quickly dying on me (they where 500GB and 1TB). Arguably every manufacturer as it shares of defective drives, during the same period I was also bitten by a Seagate firmware bug (quickly patched) rendering the drives suddenly unusable at boot time without any prior warning, just to keep things in fair perspective. After those bad batches I changed my WD drives for Samsung's, they were both cheap and efficient, and since they are still running I can now say reliable too. Later I felt the need to try so called "green drive" for use in external enclosures and NAS, due to their lower power consumption and operating temperature. I gave WD caviar green "EAR*" series a shot (1TB and later 2TB), long story short the performances where very poor, the implementation of "advanced format" would render them unusable (incompatible) with most NAS, and tricky to partition in Linux. Even when properly running the operating temperature wasn't a lot different from my Samsung's drive, the performance far behind, the price higher, and the reliability no better. In raid the drives would be regularly kicked out of the volume, for no apparent reason. After loosing time in forum and tech support I sent the drives back, got Seagate's "Eco green" as a replacement (seagate bought samsung's disk business around that time), and they are running fine where the WD weren't.

I am no google, on my comparatively very small yearly drive consumption every bad series becomes a statistical monster, it would probably not be noticeable on a bigger scale. Still search engines aren't short on WD "green" bad stories.

Reply to: