Hardware Need some advice on HDDs

[MichiS97]

Hey,

I've been looking into some 3TB HDDs lately and would like to get some advice from you guys. I have two 1TB drives by Seagate (the series is listed as Baracuda on the German Amazon site but I can't find it with this name on the English page, but the model number is ST3000DM001) in my PC but one (my main drive which currently runs Windows) will be completely full soonish (only 60GB left). Now there are also 3TB drives available from this series and since I'm very pleased with the two I already have I will probably buy that one unless someone recommends me another drive.
I would use the new HDD for installing games on it and just for general file storage, you know films, music and stuff so the drive would really be just for everyday use. However, it would be nice to have a drive with a good writing speed since I'm recording gameplay videos every once in a while and slow drives cause serious lag in those videos. Since my other drives are fast enough too, I guess going with SeaGate again wouldn't be too bad of an idea.
So do you guys know of any other drive that would fit my needs?
Also, my mainboard only has two SATA III ports, and four SATA II, but I've read that it doesn't really make a difference dealing with normal HDDs. Is that right? I guess the potential of SATA III is only needed for SSDs? Speaking of SSDs, are the ones by Samsung any good? And is a 120GB one big enough for running Windows and maybe a small amount of programmes like PhotoShop?
Furthermore, I've come across these SSHDs by Seagate, do they really make such a huge difference? How is it with my SATA dilemma with those drives?

Please don't think of me as some sort of tech illiterate for asking these questions but I'd simply like to get some recommendations by my fellow tempers

Thanks in advance,
Michael

 

[FAST6191]

As long as you are not buying a 5600rpm one aimed at CCTV/security camera use (WD call theirs Green, offhand I am not sure was Seagate call their equivalents) then write speeds should be good enough for capture purposes, especially if it is not being used to load the game and OS as well. Are you sure the hard drive is the bottleneck though? Capturing to X264 I would usually expect the CPU to be the hold up, if you are capturing to raw or some kind of older big lossless format at greater than 1080p then I can see hard drives coming back in, if you are doing raw frames though then you might want to look into changing that. I would also take a trip to the BIOS and make sure you are running in AHCI mode rather than IDE emulation as such things also can cause slowdown (you might have put it in IDE to get an old OS installer to work at some point).
In this particular case there are an awful lot of reviews complaining about the failure rate of the ST3000DM001

https://www.backblaze.com/blog/3tb-hard-drive-failure/

model ST3000DM001, into Backblaze Storage Pods. In our experience, 80% of the hard drives we deploy will function at least 4 years. As of March 31, 2015, just 10% of the Seagate 3TB drives deployed in 2012 are still in service.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148844
http://www.scan.co.uk/products/3tb-...sata-iii-6gb-s-7200rpm-64mb-cache-8ms-ncq-oem
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Seagate-ST3000DM001-Barracuda-3000-Internal/dp/B005T3GRLY
http://www.amazon.com/Seagate-Desktop-3-5-Inch-Internal-ST3000DM001/dp/B005T3GRLY

It looks like there might be some better versions now but it might also just be worth finding something else. At this point I do not have an alternative to suggest.

SSHD = solid state hybrid drive? If so then I am not the fondest of them. Most of the ones I have dealt (not that many but a broad selection of manufacturers) with seem to die sooner than others and nobody is really making them any more either.

SSDs then. If you are doing it "properly" then you would probably be told to only buy SSDs from those people that also make NAND chips. Samsung would be one such company. I am not convinced of the need to do that but price wise there is usually not a lot in it.

I have a variety of 120 gig SSDs running an OS and a decent selection of programs in all sorts of different systems, including adobe stuff. If you are also going to use it to store massive games, videos and years and years of music then it will probably run out but for basic OS use then 120 gigs is fine.

If you have a spare PCIe port then you can always stick a sata card in, here is a cheaper one with a couple of SATAIII ports http://www.amazon.de/tinxi®-PCI-E-Express-interne-Controller/dp/B005GCXS10/
For the most part it is only in crazy RAID type setups, RAM based hard drives (not that I am aware of any that do SATAIII right now) and SSDs from the last couple of years that SATAIII will come into its own. It might even do better as the sata controller on many a consumer motherboard is not the greatest.

 

[MichiS97]

Thanks, I'm gonna find an alternative for the ST3000DM001 then A SSD will probably hit the shopping cart too then...
As for the SATA Controller: I guess I'll just stick to the SATA II ports for my HDDs and use the SATA III one for my SSD, I can always install the PCIe controller at a later time
Thanks again!

 

[Duo8]

3TB Seagates seem to be not reliable, the rest are fine. I have an almost 2-year 1TB myself.

If anything I've heard quite some complaints about certain WD drives lately, but that could be subjective.

 

[raystriker]

You could even try the RAID 0 config on your existing 1TB HDDs on the SATA III and use the 3TB with a SATA II

 

[Duo8]

Thanks, I'm gonna find an alternative for the ST3000DM001 then A SSD will probably hit the shopping cart too then...
As for the SATA Controller: I guess I'll just stick to the SATA II ports for my HDDs and use the SATA III one for my SSD, I can always install the PCIe controller at a later time
Thanks again!

There are 2 ports on the inside as well.

 

[MichiS97]

You could even try the RAID 0 config on your existing 1TB HDDs on the SATA III and use the 3TB with a SATA II

Now I'm going to sound awfully stupid again, but what is RAID exactlx and how would I benefit from it?

@Duo8: Yeah, I've seen it to, that's why I edited the post

 

[Duo8]

Now I'm going to sound awfully stupid again, but what is RAID exactlx and how would I benefit from it?

@Duo8: Yeah, I've seen it to, that's why I edited the post

RAID is a way to utilize an array of hard drives at once with different modes, each mode suitable for a specific purpose.

RAID 0 is used to increase performance, but is the least reliable of all modes.

 

[MichiS97]

RAID is a way to utilize an array of hard drives at once with different modes, each mode suitable for a specific purpose.

Thanks, I've just read some articles about it

 

[raystriker]

So Basically RAID 0= better performance.

So with the two 1TBs on RAID 0, and as you've already said, they perform well as it is, you increase their performance further. @MichiS97

 

[MichiS97]

Hm yes but I'd have to make a backup of all my files if I don't want to lose anything and that's honestly too much of a hassle for me. I will set that up if I ever format my system though

 

[raystriker]

Get the 3TB HDD and spend a weekend with them HDDs

 

[Duo8]

Hm yes but I'd have to make a backup of all my files if I don't want to lose anything and that's honestly too much of a hassle for me. I will set that up if I ever format my system though

There are RAID recovery softwares out there. That said keeping a backup should always be done under any circumstances.
If you want to setup a RAID array, you should do it with completely new drives of the same model.

 

[MichiS97]

I graduated from school and won't have anything to do until I'll start studying in October anyway Don't wanna re-install all my programmes though

 

[Duo8]

Unrelated but I just saw someone claimed to be running on "a raid 0 that consist of 32 1.8 inch HDDs" for 5 years.

 

[The Real Jdbye]

Whatever you go with, avoid Seagate, they are the least reliable by far. I have a Seagate drive in my desktop that is failing on me now, had it for a few years though, but none of my other drives show any signs of failing any time soon (other than the one I damaged by carelessly throwing it onto my bed), including drives I've had longer. Seagate drives have a much higher failure rate and will probably fail sooner, so even if they are cheaper they will cost more in the long run.
HGST/Hitachi/Toshiba are the most reliable drives around by far (they're all really HGST drives, since WD now owns HGST and Toshiba has rights to produce their 3.5" drives), but the others apart from Seagate are not doing badly either.

 

[MichiS97]

Whatever you go with, avoid Seagate, they are the least reliable by far. I have a Seagate drive in my desktop that is failing on me now, had it for a few years though, but none of my other drives show any signs of failing any time soon (other than the one I damaged by carelessly throwing it onto my bed), including drives I've had longer. Seagate drives have a much higher failure rate and will probably fail sooner, so even if they are cheaper they will cost more in the long run.
HGST/Hitachi/Toshiba are the most reliable drives around by far (they're all really HGST drives, since WD now owns HGST and Toshiba has rights to produce their 3.5" drives), but the others apart from Seagate are not doing badly either.

I've got the DT01ACA300 by Toshiba on my bucket list now, it's even cheaper than the SeaGate one. Is that one any good?

 

[The Real Jdbye]

I've got the DT01ACA300 by Toshiba on my bucket list now, it's even cheaper than the SeaGate one. Is that one any good?

That appears to be the same as the old Hitachi DeskStar, so it should be great.

 

[MichiS97]

Nice, it's even cheaper than the Seagate one, can't complain then

Thanks @The Real Jdbye

 

[Originality]

One slight correction to FAST's info, Western Digital Caviar Green is their "Eco" drive prioritising low power usage and power saving (I.e. Spindown) features. I've seen 5400 and 7200rpm versions, but they generally do have slower access times and are mostly designed for media storage only. It's the "Red" series that are designed for 24h operation in CCTV/NAS/server solutions which have slower access speeds but are actually better at handling multiple access requests (search and read whilst still recording sequentially).

For better access speeds, WD either have the "Blue" series which is relatively cheap and middle range (I don't actually know if it has any outstanding features) or the "Black" series which has much better access speeds but a significant price premium.

I'm also in the camp that avoids SeaGate at all costs (ever since they acquired Maxtor) but for several years they have been getting consistently good reviews at bit-tech (who prioritise performance and stability, since it's difficult to objectively review longevity at launch outside of warranty periods). Can't say anything about Toshiba drives though, except that the dozen or so I've dealt with in the past are still ticking along (much more than SeaGate).

For SSDs, I keep hearing the same song year after year. Samsung SSDs for performance (actually OCZ and a couple others get slightly better performance, but Samsung are considered one of the most reliable brands) and Crucial for value (price per GB whilst still having decent performance). 120GB is more than enough for the OS, but beware of some apps that tend to secretly suck up all your space (here's looking at you, Apple's accursed iTunes!). For myself I've got 120GB for the OS and 250GB for Steam/Origin.

If you have a SSD for your OS drive, it doesn't actually matter much if you get a high performance HDD or a cheaper "Eco" HDD. The only thing the access speeds noticeably affect is loading times (e.g. Unpacking large levels/environments in games). It's only the OS and the swap file that largely benefit from the faster access speeds, as the rest tends to be down to CPU/RAM speeds and optimised coding (huge overgeneralisation, but still).