I need to get another hard drive for storage, I'm going to get
something at 500GB or larger. After reading reviews on new-egg I'm all
freaked out about hard drives pooping out after 2 weeks.

What's the best brand of hard drive?

Western Digital
Seagate
Hitachi
SAMSUNG


I have a raptor now for my C drive and it's worked perfectly for over
1 1/2 years. But I can't afford to use raptors as storage drives so I
have to choose something else. And I know WD makes raptor, but toyota
also makes lexus if you know what I mean. I just want to get the best
storage drive I can.

sicc wrote:
snip...

It seems that everyone has a different interpretation of "best". Do we
want most storage per $, best lifetime, lowest power consumption, least
noise, fastest read, fastest write, lowest latency, fastest access time,
etc? Personally, and I know that many will disagree, I aim for
reasonable cost and longest expected lifetime as long as the other drive
parameters are within reason. Lately I've been buying nothing but
Seagate drives based on experience and their standard 5-year warranty. I
figure that if their bean counters have 2 years more confidence in their
drives than other manufacturers do in theirs there is probably something
going on to support it.

Tom's Hardware has a pretty comprehensive drive comparison system at
http://www23.tomshardware.com/storage.html which seems to cover most of
the high points and which allows comparison between any two specific drives.


--
John McGaw
[Knoxville, TN, USA]
http://johnmcgaw.com

On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 05:52:31 -0800 (PST), sicc
<b34nzzz@gmail.com> wrote:


I don't know what you mean, a Lexus is not inherantly more
reliable than a Toyota... it's fancier and fancy doesn't
count for much with hard drives used for mass storage.

All the above manufacturers make drives used in millions of
systems, that work fine. All of the above also have a small
% of products fail, and you will hear far more about drives
failing than about the ones that don't.

There is no way to know which is best because past
generational data does not apply to current generations.
Only the manufacturers themselves have enough data about
failure rates of current generations and they are not going
to kill their sales by divulging any problems.

In short, you pays your money and takes your chances like
everyone else. There is no best choice except to not pick a
brand, rather to pick using a good backup strategy so
failure doesn't matter so much.

"sicc" <b34nzzz@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:cce1fbc7-2662-4cea-9b52-d63513c6d2f3@n20g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
The only comments we can offer are personal opinons, because you haven't
told us what your priorities are.

Personally I would go for (and have) the 500GB or the 750GB WD drive and I
would avoid Maxtor like the plague, but I repeat - that is my personal
preference. If you go for the WD, the latest 16MB (I think the model is the
SE16 range?) cache version as it is very quiet and very fast, but there is
probably no noticable day-to-day performance difference with all the latest
offerings.

Did you write Samsung in capitals to try to influence our answers?

On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 13:43:45 -0000, "GT"
<ContactGT_remove_@hotmail.com> wrote:

.... because you realize that Maxtor packaged equivalent
drives are now Seagates, right?



There's no practical benefit to 16MB cache for bulk storage,
but on the other hand if it doesn't cost any more than
lesser cache...

"kony" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:h5jgm31035airo75s50fl2p9cr8l7ueju4@4ax.com...
No, I didn't know that Maxtor now produce drives for Seagate. When did
Maxtor take over Seagate? Or is it the other way round? Or have I got the
wrong end of the stick again?!?

The 16MB cache was not the reason I was recommending that model range, just
that's the easiest way to identify the drive in some shops!

On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 11:07:37 -0000, "GT"
<ContactGT_remove_@hotmail.com> wrote:


No, the drives in the budget grade maxtor series, maxtor
labeled boxes are actually Seagate designed, made, identical
to the equivalent Seagate model # on the drive, then a label
that has "maxtor" is slapped on. The main difference is
that Seagate, who now owns Maxtor, sells them under the
Maxtor name with 3 year rather than 5 year warranty.

On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 15:34:31 -0600, Joel <Joel@NoSpam.com>
wrote:



A lot of people, myself included except for one several
generations old family/model, don't find Maxtor drives
significantly more failure prone than other brands. I also
recall there seemed a higher failure rate of a more recent
Seagate (was 7900.8 or .9 something-or-other) model.

Hard drives are a crapshoot, so if there are 4 brands on a
store shelf and Seagate has 50% of the boxes on that shelf
including those labeled as Maxtor, that's better than only
having 25% labeled Seagate. Maybe they will eventually kill
the Maxtor name, or maybe Seagate will eventually only sell
PATA drives under the Maxtor name... they'd already
announced they won't be making PATA drives after a certain
point, though I forget when but it might be the end of this
quarter.

That seems a shame to me, plenty of people are looking to
buy larger or replace failed drives in legacy systems, but
since the most volume seems to be in OEM sales and OEMs use
SATA now, I just hope it doesn't effect pricing of PATA
drives from other brands too badly. In past years I was
getting drives in low-median capacity for $50 and less after
a rebate, but I doubt rebates will persist for PATA drives
once they become low volume parts.

sicc wrote:
No such thing as "best" these days. Any HDD can fail after 2 weeks, any
brand.







--
http://www.bootdisk.com/

sicc wrote:
ps test your PS before you install a new HDD. Many HDDs fail in two
weeks do to bad PS's











--
http://www.bootdisk.com/

sicc wrote:
Power Supply Reference Sheet

Here are the ATX allowances for power supply voltage spec deviation,
measured at the motherboard power connector, negative test lead on the
chassis frame for reference ground.

+12VDC output +/- 5% (11.4V to 12.6V) This rail may deviate up to +/-
10% if the supply is under peak loading.

+5VDC output +/- 5% (4.75V to 5.25V)<BR>
+3.3VDC output +/- 5% (3.14V to 3.47V)<BR>
-5VDC output +/-10% (-4.50V to -5.50V)<BR>
-12VDC output +/- 10% (-10.80V to -13.20V)<BR>
+5VSB +/- 5% (4.75V to 5.25V)

If measurements show that the voltage deviations are outside the ranges
specified above, then it's time to get a new power supply. Generally
when a power supply starts to fail the voltages go up. For example, on
many PCs I've replaced hard drives on the 5 volt line when it reads
perhaps 5.4 volts. Whether that was the reason for the hard drive
failure I dont know, but I'd always insist on a new PS before I put in a
replacement drive. After all, one has to guarantee the new HDD and after
loading all the customers you certainly dont want to go back an redo the
job.



--
http://www.bootdisk.com/

On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 17:54:24 -0600, Joel <Joel@NoSpam.com>
wrote:



I can only say that I still have about a dozen maxtor drives
running at home, drives that are Maxtor designs before
Seagate bought them and started shipping Seagate drives in
Maxtor boxes.

They don't seen any more problematic or failure prone, they
just spin, some of them 24/7, without any problems.

I do admit I am more fanatical than some about good power
and cooling, but nothing extreme. For the record the Maxtor
version I found most problematic was an early 7K2 RPM
version, a "Diamondmax 40" (or "60", I can't remember which
at the moment)... was around the time when drives were 40GB
per platter.

On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 11:04:39 -0600, Joel <Joel@NoSpam.com>
wrote:


I didn't mean to imply I've not had other Maxtors fail, but
rather I've had a ton of drives over the years and the
failure rate wasn't exceptional, seems about the same as
with other brands.

sicc wrote:

Just get at least two of the Fry's HD special of the week so you can
mirror or RAID 5-6 your storage because $100 per 500GB is essentially
free compared to any data recovery service.