this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2025
32 points (97.1% liked)

Technology

62853 readers
3846 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 2 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[โ€“] Armand1@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

So to sum up the data, it sounds like:

  • WD seems to have the most reliable drives of those tested, with Toshiba being a relatively close second
  • Some models of drives are significantly more likely to fail than others, with some having a ~6% annual failure rate vs another model from the same company at 1%
  • Seagate had a rough year when it comes to reliability
  • It's hard to tell if capacity affects drive life as the drives being tested have been in use for different lengths of time
[โ€“] JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

From what I remember, Seagate has a rough year most years when it comes to reliability. Especially the 12TBs. But to be fair, most of the Seagate drives are >1 year older than the WD drives. Though when you compare then to the old HGSTs with a 0.08% average failure rate ๐Ÿ˜…

Also the 22TB WD drives at 1% after less than 2 years of service. Oof.