laptop vs desktop rust spinner longevity

[eccerr0r]

Re: laptop vs desktop rust spinner longevity

Can't say that's true, they all will fail at some point.

Hmm... my WD Green 2TB HDD (3.5", which incidentally gets 120MB/sec sequential - probably one of my slower 2T disks) in my PVR now is 83K POH... I wonder when this disk is going to croak. Has exactly 1 pending sector at the moment, and been backing this up to other media frequently now. Don't know what things would be like if I had a 2.5" there from the start...

I have yet to find where that pending sector is... must be in the slack space somewhere as I can read all files (that's what backup is doing!) without invoking a read error.

(My dying 2T WD 5400 RPM RE4 disk is the slowest, it only gets about 100MB/sec. It's still working however, at least the first part of the disk. I wonder if I should simply HPA the bad portion of the disk...)

[ChaosLegionnaire]

Re: laptop vs desktop rust spinner longevity

yupp and newer disks are all more failure prone because they try to pack too many bits per square inch into the platters so just a minute defect results in the loss of quite a few megabytes of data, so yea, whats his point indeed? hehe!

so the older drives may be slower but they tend to last much longer than the newer, faster ones.

[eccerr0r]

Re: laptop vs desktop rust spinner longevity

Yeah, newer disks are all faster, so what's your point?

[TechGeek]

Re: laptop vs desktop rust spinner longevity

Doing sequential reads from the Green AV disk doesn't seem that spectacular.
The Enterprise WD disk and one of the two Blue WD disks seems to be the two that stand out in sequential reads at around 90MB/sec - they may be newer than the others and use a single high density platter though this usually makes them slower, go figure.

The others seem very pedestrian and around 60MB/sec sequential though some hit 70MB/sec. Did not test seek performance.

I extracted the two faster disks and put the slower WD disks with a like-slow Seagate 500G disks in a RAID5 and its performance is ho-hum, about as expected.

I also RAIDed a bunch of 750G disks, all identical Seagates that hit around 74MB/sec. This RAID feels much snappier in performance than the hodge podge RAID with dissimilar brand and model disks. Likewise untrusted disks so they are also encrypted.

I've got a triplet of WD Black drives in my main computer, and they'd blow the socks off of those drives at 120MB/s+ all day long.

[eccerr0r]

Re: laptop vs desktop rust spinner longevity

Doing sequential reads from the Green AV disk doesn't seem that spectacular.
The Enterprise WD disk and one of the two Blue WD disks seems to be the two that stand out in sequential reads at around 90MB/sec - they may be newer than the others and use a single high density platter though this usually makes them slower, go figure.

The others seem very pedestrian and around 60MB/sec sequential though some hit 70MB/sec. Did not test seek performance.

I extracted the two faster disks and put the slower WD disks with a like-slow Seagate 500G disks in a RAID5 and its performance is ho-hum, about as expected.

I also RAIDed a bunch of 750G disks, all identical Seagates that hit around 74MB/sec. This RAID feels much snappier in performance than the hodge podge RAID with dissimilar brand and model disks. Likewise untrusted disks so they are also encrypted.

[stj]

Re: laptop vs desktop rust spinner longevity

strange, the "video" drives used to be "white" series.
video drives have different formware btw, for pc use they will seem a little slow on seek.
the firmware tries to write consecutive sectors like a dvd to keep head seek to a minimum while writing live video.
a data drive normally scatters the data all over the platters to minimise and even our the wear.

[eccerr0r]

Re: laptop vs desktop rust spinner longevity

I ended up getting a bunch of old WD disks recently, and now have two blues (different models -- one is faster than the other), an enterprise, and two greens. One of the two greens is an "always on" AVDS disk... which is kind of weird.

Most of these disks are in a Linux full disk encrypted software RAID now as I don't quite trust the used disks. RAID for loss, and encryption so I can give or throw away the disk any time... These are all 3.5" disks however.

[nobbnobb1]

Re: laptop vs desktop rust spinner longevity

I don't know if drive manufacturers still make "extreme" editions of their drives for severe industrial or 24/7 environments, but that used to be common. I built a home server back in 2009 using basic WD Green 1TB 3.5" drives for storage and running the OS on a Seagate EE25 80GB extreme edition "industrial" drive. I'm STILL using this machine and it's running Windows 10 as my server OS (slowly), but all the drives have been working fine all these years. The oldest of the drives has about 90,000 hours on it!

I should probably eventually get a proper NAS but too lazy to do the migration. Might wait until Windows 10 is no longer supported. It still works fine for basic server tasks but it's definitely slow. I'm using Storage Spaces for drive mirroring which seems super easy as compared to RAID.

[eccerr0r]

Re: laptop vs desktop rust spinner longevity

hmm...looking at my spare parts I found a WD Blue 2.5" ... I should expect this drive to die an early death in a desktop/server situation...?

(Also it seems that a lot of these laptop drives have low POH limits, as in their counter hit 0 fairly quickly, unlike some desktop drives. Then again I see some server disks also show likewise...)

[dmill89]

Re: laptop vs desktop rust spinner longevity

hmm interesting. Also I suspect a lot of AIO PCs use 2.5" drives too, though there may be enough space to squeeze a 3.5" somewhere...

It varies, some AIOs use 3.5" HDDs and some use 2.5", newer units are more likely to have 2.5", but they are also more likely to come with SSDs. I haven't seen inside any really new (<2year old) AIOs yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if they go the way of many newer laptops and ditch the SATA drive entirely and only have an NVMe slot for an SSD.

[eccerr0r]

Re: laptop vs desktop rust spinner longevity

hmm interesting. Also I suspect a lot of AIO PCs use 2.5" drives too, though there may be enough space to squeeze a 3.5" somewhere...

Yes. QLC/TLC SSDs don't do well in high turnover data applications. Which is disappointing as that's what it make it nice - the write speed...

(I use a MLC/2BPC SSD to cache my rust spinners on my server. I cache most of the usual stuff but have another partition that I don't cache - and the high turnover stuff gets put there.)

[ChaosLegionnaire]

Re: laptop vs desktop rust spinner longevity

i have heard momaka mention before that some consoles also use 2.5" laptop drives and he has had encountered many consoles with busted laptop drives too. i dont think people regularly use their consoles as a frisbee though... though they can get knocked over accidentally from time to time.

i also only use wd scorpio black as the only type of spinning rust drive in my laptops. i sometimes switch back to using spinning rust in my laptop from an ssd when i need to do some write intensive applications. its a transcend qlc ssd so it cant handle heavy writing. dont want to wear out the qlc drive sooner and make more crap in the landfill!

[dragos2009]

Re: laptop vs desktop rust spinner longevity

stay away from 2.5inch seagate drives.
specially the rose(something) series.
rossman has posted a lot about those shit drives.

this is the vid you talking about https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6b0JcNqkZrk the drives codename are rosewood and just by looking at it's platters cover you can judge that it is a shitty designed drive

[noppa]

Re: laptop vs desktop rust spinner longevity

Do these drives (scorpio blue, rosewell, momentus) last longer if they weren't in laptop situations?

None of my laptop drives (excluding so far: SSDs but offtopic) last long, but they were all in laptops...

On any laptop drive dying check for SMART attribute #191 and keep a
simple statistics.
On almost any 2,5'' drive I worked for data recovery or refurbishing
that value make me understand what happened to the drive!

[stj]

Re: laptop vs desktop rust spinner longevity

if you run a laptop on your lap, most will overheat because the intake for the cpu fan is on the underside.

this is fucking dumb btw, on older machines the intake was ofen through the keyboard or the side of the machine

[dmill89]

Re: laptop vs desktop rust spinner longevity

Do these drives (scorpio blue, rosewell, momentus) last longer if they weren't in laptop situations?

None of my laptop drives (excluding so far: SSDs but offtopic) last long, but they were all in laptops...

Not sure about the others (though I've got an 8 year old WD Blue in my PS3 and haven't had any issues with it), but with the Seagate Momentus (at least the circa 2010s SATA ones), the failure point is usually the controller, so usage is unlikely to matter much. I've had 2 Momentus drives from this era, and one failed completely at around 2 years (no noise or warning, the drive just stopped "showing" up and was inaccessible, likely the infamous controller failure), the other one still kind of works but smelled "burnt" and was very slow (even for a mechanical drive) when I pulled it out of the laptop it was in (and replaced it with an SSD), so those definitely top my personal list of drives to stay away from.

I've got several 10+ year old laptop HDDs (most WD Black or Hitachi) that still work (the oldest being a circa 2006 WD Scorpio WD800VE 5200rpm IDE drive from my first laptop, an Acer Aspire 5004 WLMI my grandfather bought for me for Christmas back in 2005, with the WD drive being an upgrade from the 4200rpm unit the Laptop originally came with, yes once upon a time 5200rpm was actually an "upgrade"), though my Laptops are usually used on a desk or table, not on my lap or being carried while powered on (admittedly I'm less diligent about this now with SSDs, but my laptops are still stationary 95%+ of the time while being used).






As for 2.5" laptop drives vs. 2.5" (or 3.5") desktop drives. Since desktop drives aren't concerned with being thin and light they are generally much more heavily built with larger motors and bearings than laptop drives so I suspect they would last much longer, but I don't have a source of empirical data on this.

Laptop 2.5" (bottom), vs. Desktop 2.5" (WD velociraptor, this is in a heatsink but I still think you can see how much thicker the drive is, middle), vs. Desktop 3.5" (top).


now just the Laptop 2.5" (bottom) and Desktop 2.5" (top), the velociraptor is about 4 times the thickness of the Laptop drive (and both are 160GB drives)

[eccerr0r]

Re: laptop vs desktop rust spinner longevity

If someone's using a laptop on their lap then I don't care how well you can keep your lap still, there will be movement. Not to also mention laptops tend to get hotter than desktop PCs (usually).

Also I've moved 3.5" desktop drives around when power is not applied. This too tends to cause premature failure.

There are still statistics in this, people can get lucky...

[stj]

Re: laptop vs desktop rust spinner longevity

are you using them while moving the machine?
i have old toshiba laptop drives over 10years old still going strong.
i *never* move a running machine though.

[eccerr0r]

Re: laptop vs desktop rust spinner longevity

Do these drives (scorpio blue, rosewell, momentus) last longer if they weren't in laptop situations?

None of my laptop drives (excluding so far: SSDs but offtopic) last long, but they were all in laptops...

[stj]

Re: laptop vs desktop rust spinner longevity

i only have WD black series
didnt buy for the speed, chose it for the 5year warranty