3TB Hard Drive Toshiba 7200rpm - £64.99 amazon
521°Expired

3TB Hard Drive Toshiba 7200rpm - £64.99 amazon

29
Found 3rd Apr
This is the cheapest cost per TB I can find for a non Barracuda 7200rpm hard drive (those barracuda failure rates are powerful)

Some suggestions in the reviews this is a hitachi drive.
Community Updates

Groups

29 Comments
Obvious cat is obvious - but just incase people get confused, this is a full size desktop HDD, not a 2.5 for laptops or consoles.
Is this any good? Been looking for a hard drive for a whil
Good hard drive.
to OP - What are 'powerful' failure rates? Good or bad?
Avatar
deleted1315437
Great price
grandwazoo29 m ago

to OP - What are 'powerful' failure rates? Good or bad?


Bad, although I've had a 500gb seagate for 5 years still plugging away
grandwazoo29 m ago

to OP - What are 'powerful' failure rates? Good or bad?


It's bad, you can get the Barracudas far cheaper than any other hard drive but they seem far more likely to die.

extremetech.com/g00…a=1
Whats Toshiba like for hard drives? Only go with WD these days but this is a good price...
Vistrix4 m ago

Whats Toshiba like for hard drives? Only go with WD these days but this is …Whats Toshiba like for hard drives? Only go with WD these days but this is a good price...


Very good reliability. They bought the desktop HDD division from IBM/Hitachi a few years back.

I've got 4 the early 3TB Toshiba's in a Microserver and they've not so much as blinked. The Backblaze stats show that WD and Seagate are much more likely to fail.
Edited by: "MagicBoy" 3rd Apr
Just got a 1 tb Seagate for 31 quid there not really a wise decision on reflection
retrend1 h, 47 m ago

It's bad, you can get the Barracudas far cheaper than any other hard drive …It's bad, you can get the Barracudas far cheaper than any other hard drive but they seem far more likely to die.https://www.extremetech.com/g00/3_c-6bbb.jcywjrjyjhm.htr_/c-6RTWJUMJZX77x24myyux78x3ax2fx2fbbb.jcywjrjyjhm.htrx2fbu-htsyjsyx2fzuqtfix78x2f7563x2f57x2fMII-Xqnij6-Qfwlj.oul_$/$/$/$/$/$?i10c.ua=1


That's not a great chart.It makes it look like a M005 has a 1 in 3 chance of failing. I prefer the 'up days' with how many drives have 'failed' chart.

33569682-eGAcx.jpg
Vistrix4 h, 6 m ago

Whats Toshiba like for hard drives? Only go with WD these days but this is …Whats Toshiba like for hard drives? Only go with WD these days but this is a good price...


Toshiba have proved ultra reliable for Backblaze and they use them in a 24/7 server environment. For a home user they should prove just as reliable, unless you drop it.

My experiences with Seagate and WD are as shown by the backblaze report. They are likely to fail on average every 3 years irrespective in server or home environment. .

Most of the drives in the external backup devices will be the least reliable drives from the least reliable manufacturers. So I hope you do back ups of those backups.

For the home user it is the constant on/off that does the damage, and the irregular quality of the power supply, which is more wearing on the life of a hard drive than being constantly on in a regulated environment. Mostly they fail soon after the 3 years and most of the ex server ones I purchased from e-bay failed within months, which is why data centres replace their hard drives as soon as the warranty expires. They monitor the health of their drives so know when they are about to become unreliable and sell them to unsuspecting fools like me.

My main data drive is now HGST and I couldn't be more pleased with it. I now wish I purchased a couple of 4tb ones when the prices were so low. Next one will also be HGST.
Edited by: "fiqqer" 3rd Apr
fiqqer1 h, 34 m ago

Toshiba have proved ultra reliable for Backblaze and they use them in a …Toshiba have proved ultra reliable for Backblaze and they use them in a 24/7 server environment. For a home user they should prove just as reliable, unless you drop it.My experiences with Seagate and WD are as shown by the backblaze report. They are likely to fail on average every 3 years irrespective in server or home environment. .Most of the drives in the external backup devices will be the least reliable drives from the least reliable manufacturers. So I hope you do back ups of those backups.For the home user it is the constant on/off that does the damage, and the irregular quality of the power supply, which is more wearing on the life of a hard drive than being constantly on in a regulated environment. Mostly they fail soon after the 3 years and most of the ex server ones I purchased from e-bay failed within months, which is why data centres replace their hard drives as soon as the warranty expires. They montor the health of their drives so know when they are about to become unreliable and sell them to unsuspecting fools like me. My main data drive is now HGST and I couldn't be more pleased with it. I now wish I purchased a couple of 4tb ones when the prices were so low. Next one will also be HGST.


Hitachi (now HGST, a subsidiary of Western Digital from 2012) has the lowest failure rates across the makes and models surveyed. Western Digital itself came in second, with numbers only slightly less impressive than HGST's. "It's hard to beat the current crop of 4TB drives from HGST and Seagate," Backblaze said in its blog post.


backblaze.com/blo…17/
I've got two Toshiba drives, a 5TB and 6TB.
The 5TB is 3yrs old, the 6TB is about 6 months old.

I have them set to spin down after a set time so that they are not constantly spinning.
Do a long format rather than a quick format when you first get it, takes hours but the whole drive is checked.
watson441 h, 28 m ago

Hitachi (now HGST, a subsidiary of Western Digital from 2012) has the …Hitachi (now HGST, a subsidiary of Western Digital from 2012) has the lowest failure rates across the makes and models surveyed. Western Digital itself came in second, with numbers only slightly less impressive than HGST's. "It's hard to beat the current crop of 4TB drives from HGST and Seagate," Backblaze said in its blog post.https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-stats-for-2017/



Yes the newer drives are much better, but you need to know which are the new drives - there are still massive amounts of the older, unreliable drives being sold as new. Checks on their external backup drives show up as the same drives used for these backblaze results.

The only guaranteed way of ensuring you have the newer seagate or WD drives is to purchase 8tb ones. Although you still have to check you are not buying one of their "Archive" drives though as they will be frustratingly slow.

Although HGST are now a subsidary of WD thankfully they have been allowed to operate as a seperate enterprise.
Edited by: "fiqqer" 3rd Apr
Are these okay to run in a NAS drive?
rickygosling726 m ago

Are these okay to run in a NAS drive?


Most of the forums say they are as good as the WD red in a NAS and reliability is very good - they have Hitachi roots so reliability should be on par with HGST drives, irrespective of whether they are rebadged Hitachi drives or newer Toshiba ones which will still have the Hitachi design - Toshiba bought out the Hitachi consumer products, WD (HGST) bought out the enterprise/high end products.
Edited by: "fiqqer" 3rd Apr
fiqqer5 m ago

Most of the forums say they are as good as the WD red in a NAS and …Most of the forums say they are as good as the WD red in a NAS and reliability is very good - they have Hitachi roots so reliability should be on par with HGST drives, irrespective of whether they are rebadged Hitachi drives or newer Toshiba ones which will still have the Hitachi design - Toshiba bought out the Hitachi consumer products, WD (HGST) bought out the enterprise/high end products.


So if I get 2 and have them mirrored they should be fine.

I already have 2 WD red 3TB ones in the NAS drive but need more storage for my business.
rickygosling71 h, 7 m ago

So if I get 2 and have them mirrored they should be fine.I already have 2 …So if I get 2 and have them mirrored they should be fine.I already have 2 WD red 3TB ones in the NAS drive but need more storage for my business.


I would get the E300 5400 RPM version. They use less power and are only a couple of quid more. You won't notice any performance difference in a NAS - they can easily saturate gigabit ethernet.
Edited by: "hosiery" 3rd Apr
fiqqer2 h, 19 m ago

Yes the newer drives are much better, but you need to know which are the …Yes the newer drives are much better, but you need to know which are the new drives - there are still massive amounts of the older, unreliable drives being sold as new. Checks on their external backup drives show up as the same drives used for these backblaze results.The only guaranteed way of ensuring you have the newer seagate or WD drives is to purchase 8tb ones. Although you still have to check you are not buying one of their "Archive" drives though as they will be frustratingly slow.Although HGST are now a subsidary of WD thankfully they have been allowed to operate as a seperate enterprise.


i was considering 2x4TB, but as you say, best to steer clear and get an 8TB
hosiery45 m ago

I would get the E300 5400 RPM version. They use less power and are only a …I would get the E300 5400 RPM version. They use less power and are only a couple of quid more. You won't notice any performance difference in a NAS - they can easily saturate gigabit ethernet.


Would I be better off getting 2 of these?

amazon.co.uk/dp/…c=1
I have had so many HGSTS from Hitachi , before they were sold. NOT 1 FAILED ... EVER !!!
MagicBoy7 h, 12 m ago

Very good reliability. They bought the desktop HDD division from …Very good reliability. They bought the desktop HDD division from IBM/Hitachi a few years back.I've got 4 the early 3TB Toshiba's in a Microserver and they've not so much as blinked. The Backblaze stats show that WD and Seagate are much more likely to fail.


But the same data also suggests 1.5/3TB is less reliable than 2/4TB drives....
rickygosling712 h, 43 m ago

Would I be better off getting 2 of …Would I be better off getting 2 of these?https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01N9SN9ST?tag=hotukdeals062-21&th=1&psc=1


Again, they are 7200 RPM drives. For a business NAS I would spend the extra tenner and get WD Reds.
rickygosling712 h, 52 m ago

Would I be better off getting 2 of …Would I be better off getting 2 of these?https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01N9SN9ST?tag=hotukdeals062-21&th=1&psc=1



I would think so, they have a few things a standard desktop drive doesn't have - vibration sensors and heat control to reduce two of the things that can lessen the life/reliability of drives. There is a compromise with speed vs the X300 but should be a more reliable drive.
Will this be any good for a freeview box? Thanks
Picard12315 h, 14 m ago

But the same data also suggests 1.5/3TB is less reliable than 2/4TB …But the same data also suggests 1.5/3TB is less reliable than 2/4TB drives....



For Toshiba?
Rookiereece1003rd Apr

Bad, although I've had a 500gb seagate for 5 years still plugging away


See, everyone says stay away from Seagate, but I've had 11 WD and 6 Seagate hard drives over the years, I've had three WD fail, another one seems to be on it's last legs, and the only Seagate that's failed on me was due to me dropping it down the stairs. Must be a weird lottery I'm just good at winning or something because I seem to be the only one who has better luck with Seagate than WD.
ktbffh4th Apr

Will this be any good for a freeview box? Thanks



I don't know but it will probably depend on which model you have? It's not necessarily a straight swap. A good forum to look on is hummy TV for Humax and youview boxes.
Edited by: "stec77" 6th Apr
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text