Seagate BarraCuda Pro 10TB HDD Review

[Apoptosis]

Earlier this month Seagate announced their new ‘Guardian Series’ of Hard Disk Drives (HDDs) and that the BarraCuda name was being revived! Seagate brought back the BarraCuda name in grand fashion as there is a BarraCuda Pro 10TB drive and that makes it the world’s highest capacity consumer HDD. What a better way than to come back after being away for nearly three years and being the largest capacity drive in the World!




Article Title: Seagate BarraCuda Pro 10TB HDD Review
Article URL: http://www.legitreviews.com/seagate-bar ... iew_184738
Pricing At Time of Print: $508.99 shipped from Amazon

[sbohdan]

I would be mostly interested not in capacity but how secure is the data on it! The bigger the drive is, the more data can be lost, so I want to know how sturdy, durable the drive is. I lost too much data before because of high capacity but garbage quality HDD's! I would like to see reliable durability tests from the manufacturers and WAY better quality control!

[KnightRid]

I agree. They could send me 5 of them to put in my Synology 1512+ NAS for a long term test

10TB is a lot to lose at once but it would be perfect for NAS applications if they are durable enough for long term. I could actually fit my blu ray and dvd collection all on them!

[DJ Tucker]

I've had hdd problems in the past and agree with you guys. it's it durable enough to last as backing up this drive would mean you would need 2 of them to be safe and that's a lot of time and money wasted if they fail just as the old hdd did.

[Apoptosis]

You wouldn't want to use this drive in a NAS as it's not rated for 24/7 use. The Seagate FireCuda 10TB NAS drive is rated for 24 hours of use and costs less - $448.99.

The best failure data is given by BackBlaze - https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-dri ... s-q1-2016/

[bubba]

They have a long way to go to get my trust back. One too many failed drives. They might be getting better, but I don't know.

Aside from trust issues, doubt I would use a drive that large.. maybe after they mature a bit. For now I will stick with a large RAID in my NAS.

[Apoptosis]

They have a long way to go to get my trust back. One too many failed drives. They might be getting better, but I don't know.

I think most hard drive companies got a bad reputation when many were putting the lowest priced 'green' hard drives in a NAS and were killing them. Now with specialized firmware for each niche the failure rates are getting better. The BackBlaze numbers for Seagate have gotten dramatically better in the past year and they actually have a lower failure rate than WD.

[KnightRid]

So far I have never had one of my Western Digital Red 3TB drives fail in the NAS (knock on wood). Kind of surprising when I see that chart and a bit concerning too

[DJ Tucker]

That's quite a high fail rate but that's based on quite a few drives. I have a Seagate barracuda in my partners system that is 9 years old and still going strong. It was 90mbps read and 80mbps write when new. It's now 60mbps read and 60mbps write and the 4k read and write are the same as it was when I brought the drive (0.6mbps). it has a total of 10000+ power on hours. Doing me proud

[bubba]

They have a long way to go to get my trust back. One too many failed drives. They might be getting better, but I don't know.

I think most hard drive companies got a bad reputation when many were putting the lowest priced 'green' hard drives in a NAS and were killing them. Now with specialized firmware for each niche the failure rates are getting better. The BackBlaze numbers for Seagate have gotten dramatically better in the past year and they actually have a lower failure rate than WD.

I wasn't using them in RAIDs, they non-green cuda drives and were in run of the mill desktops. Some come in off the shelf systems, some I built. After about 60 failed drives in a year or so span I gave up on them. I know a lot of people that are running their drives now, I just still have the bad feelings about them.

I did run into issues with WD Greens in NAS systems. The S.M.A.R.T. stuff on the drives always caused errors in the RAID, replaced them with BLACK series drives. Wasn't long after that the RED drives showed up. I run the RED drives in NAS systems for data, Purple drives on the one surveillance setup I have (part of a NAS).

Even then, 10TB drives... thats A LOT of data. 6 drive RAID6 is 37ishTB of formatted space with 2 drive fault buffer...