9.62/TB
Too bad it’s Seagate.
Is this model from seagate prone to fail?
If it means anything, I have been using Seagate Ironwolf HD’s in my NAS for years now after having to switch to them when HGST went under, and I have yet to have any issues with one yet. I think I have 5 right now.
That’s a pretty good price. I don’t know how much I trust Seagate to get a drive that big though.
Is that a good idea? I mean having all of that storage on one component? Wouldn’t it be safer to split that data onto separate drives?
Probably a good candidate for drive shucking. Can get a good, potentially enterprise grade, hard drive for cheaper than the drive alone would cost. Then stick it into a NAS.
Ahh, yeah I see what you’re saying.
Actually, large drives like this make perfect sense in RAID arrays. Just make sure your using at least RAID 6 with drives this big - the rebuild times are scary long. I run a mix of 18TB drives in my home server and the key is having a solid backup strategy, not avoiding large drives. No matter the brand, always assume any drive will fail.
it’s sad how far Seagate’s reputation has fallen. In the early 90’s having Seagate SCSI drives in your pc was a point of pride!
Probably dies before you even get it half full
A price decent enough to make me consider getting a Seagate
The data hoarder in me says yes. The realist says I’m only using 4TB out of 14 right now.
I would wait. There have been recent developments about heating the HD surface with a laser to increase storage capacity. I think it’s wise to see how this develops and wether it causes problems.
