Best hard drive for use as a primary drive (non ssd)

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by sim667, Aug 7, 2011.

  1. sim667 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #1
    I wanted to buy a new hard drive to install and run the new OSX on, but I really can't afford an ssd (as was my original intention).

    I use western digital caviar green for my raid setup but they seem very slow, and every now and then make some scary noises.

    So can anyone recommend any reliable and fast hard drives for use to run the new os x in my mac pro on.
     
  2. alust2013 macrumors 601

    alust2013

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Location:
    On the fence
    #2
    Green drives are not ideal for RAID, as they have varying spindle speeds, so some of the speed of the RAID is canceled. The fastest 7200 RPM drives out there are the Caviar Black, especially the 2TB version.
     
  3. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #3
    I'll put in another nod for Western Digital's 7200rpm Caviar Blacks.

    The Greens are fine drives, but as mentioned, they're not meant for RAID. They do work wonderfully as backup/archival volumes, particularly due to the cost per GB.
     
  4. nobiggiestudio, Aug 7, 2011
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2011

    nobiggiestudio macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2011
    Location:
    Sweden
    #4
    EEW! NEVER EEVVVER WD disks again....they crashed for me.
    AND today...oh no! you'll not getting new drives..

    They send them of for repair! WHAT? -Yes, repaircenter.....that what he sad in the store were I bough them. New rules from the manufacture.
    I haven't picked mine up yet, I really don't even want to do it either.
    I know it will break again.. and I saw this happen last year over and over again at work.


    Get of and buy Seagate barracuda, Hitachi is quite good disks to but I don't trust anything else.
    I'm using seagate disks, some of them is really old. One of them is almost six years old...and the other is more than 13 years old (old UATA disk)
    The disks are used in one of my servers so its just for now when my WD Main system drive crashed.

    If you doing RAID in Hi-end, then go for Seagate constellation disks...Barracuda drives work just fine in other cases.
    Just mount them in the holders and slide them in.
    You might need an PCI-RAID card to rewire the SATA cables to the RAID card...in order to make the constellation drives spin up because these are not using SATA interface, but SAS interface.
    Link to their website
    Seagate disks are great. Works forever and they not making much noise.
     
  5. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #5
    Old Seagates were great drives, but the more recent ones (since 2008 or so) have been garbage.

    Search out the 7200.11 series, and you'll see what I'm talking about. It also affected the enterprise variants, though it didn't get the level of press the consumer versions did (aka Boot of Death for the enterprise models).

    Also keep in mind, that their enterprise drives (ES Constellation series) are built off of the consumer models (7200.xx series). Which is the case for all brands when it comes to SATA disks (just add a few sensors, cherry pick platters, and uses different firmware for the enterprise variants). The rest of it, particularly the mechanicals, are the same these days.

    BTW, Looking at the current 7200.12's, I've seen a 34% failure rate, which is horrible.

    Recent WD's OTOH, haven't had the frequency of issues as their comparable Seagates.

    I'd also recommend staying away from Hitachi's.
     
  6. crazzyeddie macrumors 68030

    crazzyeddie

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    Florida, USA
    #6
    Totally agree with this. WD Black or RAID edition is what you want for reliability. Green is fine, too, but noticeably slower.
     
  7. MacinJosh, Aug 7, 2011
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2011

    MacinJosh macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2006
    Location:
    Finland
    #7
    This is my experience with over 20 drive failures in as many years:

    Early Seagate was great. Current is garbage as was already mentioned. 4 drives dead in the last 4 years.

    Fu*****u makes up of 50% of all my drive failures. (Fujitsu)

    Western Digital. Nothing bad to report. In fact I'm impressed with it. I currently have 3 in my MP, 2 of which are over 5 years old. My TC has a WD and gone through abuse through 4 years no probs.

    No recollection of ever owning IBM/Hitachi drives. There were others but I forget.

    Edit: others were Maxtor, Quantum, Samsung, and Connor (?)

    Fujitsu acquired by Toshiba.
     
  8. blunti macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    #8
    I've been using Samsung drives for years and NEVER had problems with them. Check out Samsung F series. Highly recommended stuff!
     
  9. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #9
    Were these recent units, and were they SATA or SAS?

    I ask, as I've had great experiences with their more recent SAS disks (2008 on), particularly for workstation use (not had access to their SATA disks in forever, as WD's have worked well for me, and I'm sticking with them for now).

    Hitachi's SATA disks used to be really good (Malaysian plant), but their reliability took a nose dive when they shifted to China for finished disks. :rolleyes: :(

    Their SAS disks have been fine (particularly the 10k or 15k rpm units), but they don't share anything with their SATA counterparts (different platters, servos, spindle motors, ...).

    BTW, Western Digital recently acquired Hitachi GST, so it will be interesting to see how that shakes out (whether or not Hitachi's will get better, SATA variants go away, or worse nightmare scenario, Western Digital fall into dumpster territory :eek:). Hopefully, WD won't mess this up (fingers crossed).

    Samsung's have had reliability problems in the past, but they have gotten better.
     
  10. SamWavy macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Location:
    Toronto, ON
    #10
    +1 Western Digital's 7200rpm Caviar Blacks. I have 2 installed, might buy a 3rd.

    Green Drives are way too slow, only good for data storage.

    SSD's are too overpriced!
     
  11. codymac macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #11
    Wow. Four drives in four years?
    You're lucky.
    ;)

    I've had 3 Seagates fail just this summer. I've lost count but there's 5 failed Seagates sitting here next to me as I type this and I've got another 2/3 at the office (can't recall exactly since there's just platters left).

    I've taken to replacing them with WD Black drives.

    I'm expecting I'll lose (or throw out) another 4 Seagates before the year is over.
    :(
     
  12. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #12
    It truly is sad as to the state of QC for recent Seagates. :( But it's also frustrating, as they should never have let things get to this state IMO. :mad:
     
  13. Macsonic macrumors 65816

    Macsonic

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Location:
    Earth
    #13
    This thread is helpful. I bought a Seagate last 2010 and luckily this still works ok ( knock on wood ) But my next HD purchase will be Western Digital.
     
  14. MacinJosh macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2006
    Location:
    Finland
    #14
    Lol, wow. And I thought I had it worse. Using my "peripherals", I can see 2 dead Seagates lying around as I type this.

    1 Barracuda 7200.10 320GB ATA
    1 Momentus 5400.6 160GB SATA
    2 SATA 3.5" ones thrown away.
     
  15. getz76 macrumors 6502a

    getz76

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2009
    Location:
    Hell, AL
    #15
    Samsung 1tB HD103SJ benchmarks within a hair of a Western Digital Velociraptor WD3000HLFS 300gB. At $60, it's about a third of the price and has over three times the storage.

    I have had drives of every make fail on me. The only brands I avoid are Seagate and Hitachi, not only because of my experience with their failures but also because of the noise levels they both generate.
     
  16. PreetinderBajwa macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Location:
    HK
    #16
    Hitachi ?

    I got a Hitachi DeskStar, Sata 3, 2TB, 64 MB Cache, 3.5" disk for putting in the new iMac that I will buy this week, reading the not so positive comments about Fujitsu.... I am thinking did I get the wrong disk !
     
  17. codymac macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #17
    Agreed. It's sad to see given the value their name used to have.
    :(
     
  18. VirtualRain macrumors 603

    VirtualRain

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    #18
    Stop screwing around! What do you mean you cant afford an SSD?! You do know his is the Mac Pro forum right and not the Dell Inspiron forum :p. Just sell a kidney and get an SSD :D
     
  19. derbothaus macrumors 601

    derbothaus

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    #19
    +1 for this choice. I got 4 of them on sale for 39.95 each. They are really fast for the money. I got a good 135MB/s in Aja Disk test. Insane.
    +1 also for your current dislikes.
     
  20. scottsjack macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Location:
    Arizona
    #20
    The original 2010 MP WD Caviar Black 32MB cache 1TB drive was not as responsive as the 2TB 64MB cache model I replaced it with. Currently I'm running four WD RE4 2TB drives and one Caviar Black 2TB 64MB cache.

    The RE4 drives are said to be a little faster than the Caviar Black and more sturdy. Since they don't cost that much more why not get the best? My current boot drive is an RE4 with SL loaded then a 500MB partition with Windows 7.

    I'm very satisfied and will stay with this configuration until SSDs become larger and cheaper, maybe 2013. . .
     
  21. MacinJosh macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2006
    Location:
    Finland
    #21
    Well, the DeskStar was affectionately known as the DeathStar when IBM was still making them.

    Wikipedia: The IBM Deskstar 75GXP (as well as several other models made around the same time) became infamous for their reportedly high failure rates. This led to the drives being colloquially referred to as "Deathstars". Due to this, the drives were ranked 18th in PC World's "Worst Tech Products of All Time" feature in 2006.

    As was mentioned, WD acquired Hitachi so it's anyone's guess how that will affect quality...
     
  22. toxic macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2008
    #22
    I use a 1 TB WD Blue as my boot drive. a Black has lower latency, but I'm satisfied with the Blue so I haven't bothered upgrading.

    the Samsung HD103SJ mentioned above is better known as the Spinpoint F3. sequential IO is great, but overall random IO is better with a WD Blue, according to XBench. I use an F3 as my data drive.
     
  23. DesmoPilot macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2008
  24. codymac macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #24
    As of this morning, go ahead and make that 4 failed Seagates for me so far this summer.

    Got to the office this morning to find another Seagate 1TB throwing errors.
    :rolleyes:

    Sheesh!
    :mad:
     
  25. somnbulance macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2011
    #25
    Completely agree with this, its like they say, once you go black you never go back

    64mb cache, 7200 rpm. its fast and quiet, highly recommend them
     

Share This Page