top | item 47011759

(no title)

metadat | 15 days ago

Seagate continues the tradition of having the highest failure rates of any manufacturer, on average.

Why is that?

discuss

order

lycan1917|15 days ago

As explained at https://www.backblaze.com/blog/backblaze-drive-stats-for-q3-..., a large proportion of Backblaze's Seagate inventory are rather old drives for a datacenter (now 5-9 years in service), so a high failure rate is expected.

metadat|15 days ago

I have quantum fireball from 2000, so 26 years old, still going strong.

5 years doesn't seem that long for a drive that cost hundreds of dollars! Persistence is the point.

Just wondering why Seagate seems like the bottom of the barrel in the longevity department. Western Digital drives seem to fail a lot less frequently on average in this dataset and in my life experience.

To Seagate's credit, I do have 8x24TB drives that have been working fine for the past 4 years. Hopefully can last a few more until the compute hardware shortages pass.

rasz|15 days ago

Only expected if its Seagate. Backblaze Hitachi drives had miniscule failure rates thru their whole life cycle.

WarOnPrivacy|15 days ago

I have two particularly notorious Seagate periods:

    Seagate bought Conner when Conner had released several models w/ 
    leaky seals. Bad sectors started at the outer edge of the 
    platters and grew inward. We had a lot of these drives
    out there and Seagate refused to honor Conner's drive
    warranties. 

    The 7200.10 series had super high failure rates. I wound up 
    replacing every one in my care, within 2 years. The 7200.11
    drives weren't much better.
I think the last Seagate lines I truly trusted were the ST series of MFM and RLL drives.

adrian_b|15 days ago

I do not know, but the last time when I have bought a Seagate HDD, I had a very nasty and unpleasant surprise.

Last year I have bought a 22 TB Seagate Expansion Desktop external HDD, because it was cheaper than the other 22 or 24 TB HDDs available at that time.

I had read carefully its datasheet before buying and there was nothing suspicious there, so I assumed that it must be cheaper just because it is a slow HDD. I did not care about the speed, it was for storing data archives infrequently accessed.

Only after receiving it I discovered what was not said in the datasheet, that this Seagate HDD does not support S.M.A.R.T., so there is no way to test it to see if it works OK and there is no way to discover when errors have happened, e.g. to see when the HDD becomes too old, so you need to migrate your data.

I have never imagined that in 2025 it is possible to buy a HDD that does not support S.M.A.R.T., especially in HDDs with a capacity over 20 TB, and moreover without giving a prominent notice about such a misfeature in the datasheet.

Before this, in 2024 I had bought a 24 TB Seagate SkyHawk, which had S.M.A.R.T., as expected. Since then, after the Seagate Expansion fiasco, I have bought a 22 TB external WD HDD, at the same price with the Seagate, and which has S.M.A.R.T., as it is normal.

I cannot see how removing S.M.A.R.T. support can reduce costs, as it is just a firmware feature. I any case a manufacturer that removes testing and error reporting features from its products clearly does not give a s*t about data corruption and HDD failure rates.

the8472|15 days ago

With an external drive the SMART info might be hidden behind the USB-to-SATA bridge, smartctl has support for some of those but sometimes needs to be told with an extra argument.

jofla_net|15 days ago

Doesnt surprise me, Seagate is marching to its own drum. My experience defiantly mirrors others' higher than average failure rate as well.

My latest 'fun' experience with them, also, came in the form of an Ironwolf drive which is 'detected' on usb-to-sata interface when plugged in, around %15 of the time. While it starts up consistently on a plain SATA interface. This makes it unusable for what I need. Again, no other drive or MFG ever fails on this usbSata, just the new ironwolf, which it appears is actually for the chineese market, but was sold on newegg, but this is not necessarily seagate's fault, nevertheless.

rdschouw|15 days ago

Do you have MacOS by any chance?

MacOS does not support S.M.A.R.T over USB.

1over137|15 days ago

>there is no way to discover when errors have happened

There is: use ZFS and scrub.

But yeah, crazy that it doesn't support SMART!

TwoNineFive|15 days ago

It's regrettable that you would spread misinformation, and easily explained/debunked information at that. This is a reasonably well-known issue and even with the extremely bad and limited information you provided (no model numbers or other info), I already know exactly what your problem is.

eqvinox|15 days ago

It actually looks like they're getting better, if the changes from last year to this year are any indication.

gethly|15 days ago

"back in my day", seagate was "the shit". only much later, hitachi drives came to be popular and wd, sort of.

burnt-resistor|15 days ago

By Hitachi, you mean IBM Ultrastar. IBM drives tended to be the best.