£167.98 + £4.57 = £173.46 Cheapest I have seen so far
" For free delivery all you need is 20 forum posts", easily obtainable in an hour making this only cost £172.99" thanks to JimBobJ in post #1
3 years Manufacturer Warranty.
It is also available same price @ Scan eBay Site http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/like/131567342333?rmvSB=true
Supersized capacity, energy efficiency and lowest TCO
• Seagate brings over 30 years of trusted storage reliability to the growing need for online long-term storage.
• Industry’s best cost/GB/watt 8TB hard drive
• Engineered for 24×7 workloads of 180TB per year
• Drive down costs with up to 1.33TB-per-disk hard drive technology.
• SATA 6Gb/s interface optimizes burst performance
• Seagate AcuTrac™ servo technology delivers dependable performance.
• Free Seagate DiskWizard™ software allows you to install 5TB, 6TB and 8TB hard drives in Windows without UEFI BIOS
• Reliable, low-power data retrieval based on Shingled Magnetic Recording (SMR) technology
• RV-balanced for high density environments
Best-Fit Applications
• Cost-effective online archiving
• Object storage
• Big Data cold storage
• Cloud active archive
• Web-scale archiving
Thanks for the response. I just looked up WORM (write once, read many) drive, and yes, that describes by usage. I'm generally copying large amounts of sequential data - after that it's mostly reading. It seemed like an ideal solution for my needs: £ per TB it's the cheapest drive around as far as I can tell and at the moment it's the most efficient use of the limited space inside my servers.
GwanGy
18 Dec 15#26
Be cause they are tuned for backup use .. I.e straight sequential writes .. everything else takes a backseat. Your usage is probably ok using it as a worm drive. But as a general computer drive they have drawbacks especially writing speed. They are possibly the worst NAS raid drives you could get (unless they were made by Seagate jk ) as sharrken99 points out
norm1
15 Dec 15#10
Funny thing is Hitachi took over IBM's HDD business which were notorious for the Deathstar scandal of failing drives.
My first IDE / PATA Deathstar died on me within a week, long before a scandal. I was had invested heavily in SCSI HDDs and devices before than and I lost 22GB of data. I still ended up going back to IBM after a failing Seagate and Maxtor HDDs, and with exception of their "meowing" IBM HDDs all's been well and up until recently never had a problem since buying the Hitachi equivalents.
Currently using Samsung, Western Digital and Seagate HDDs. I have three 1.5GB Seagate HHDs, when I bought them they were failing with clicking errors, Seagate just replaced them with refurbished ones, which cheesed me off, especially as a couple of them still needed replacing a few times to get ones that weren't exhibiting the fault. I was cheesed off as I could have just bought refurbished ones in the first place for probably cheaper.
sharrken99
17 Dec 15#24
To be honest, for everyday home use you are unlikely to encounter any major problems with any modern hard drive out there. However, once you start getting into more specialized use cases, the peculiarities/features of different drives become more important.
In particular, the way these drives achieve their high capacity - using Shingled Magnetic Recording (SMR) - is a big problem for RAID arrays. Hard drives can read thinner strips on the platters than they can write, and SMR takes advantage of this by writing overlapping strips, like roof shingles (hence the name). However if you want to change some data, you have to rewrite a whole area, as both the strips before and after the one you want to change get overwritten by the wider write pattern.
If you put these in a standard RAID array and one of them fails, the bad write performance of these drives will make the rebuild take much much longer (the review here shows 57h 13m vs 19h 46m of normal style recording drives). Rebuilding is the most dangerous state a RAID can be in - further failures can mean the complete loss of your data - so you want it to be as quick as possible for the drive.
Basically, if you are just using these for straight backup or storage, not RAID, then you'll be fine. They are also very unsuited to write heavy applications, or lots of random reads (even more so than normal hard drives). For accessing a movie or audio file they'll be absolutely ok.
GwanGy
16 Dec 15#19
This is not a general drive its for cold storage dont even think about it for home use
timalina to GwanGy
17 Dec 151#23
Why (genuine question)? I'm using a few of these at home on HD video and music servers and have had no problems with them. They are a bit slower but I've streamed two films at a time without any bottleneck. I haven't tested speed out but it seems that for daily usage the limiting factor is the network and not the drives.
I'm sure there quite a bit slower when transferring files internally but what difference would it make for daily usage beyond the speed limitation?
Johnmcl7
16 Dec 15#22
Exactly, there is nothing wrong with having large amounts of data on one drive as long as it's used as part of a proper backup procedure.
John
mikerr
16 Dec 151#21
RAID is not a backup.
MikefromWinchester
16 Dec 15#20
If you are serious about data backups then I wouldn't consider backing up that much data on one drive - unless you have a backup of the backup - dangerous.
You're better off with 3, 4, 5 smaller drives in Raid 5 so even if one drive fails you still have all your data. Alternatively use the Parity option in Windows 8/10 Storage Spaces:
I'm still waiting for the SSD's to be hitting this kind of capacity. Fast with no noise and less risk of losing data if knocked. Shame when it happens it'll cost in the region of £1,000+
thedvdmonster
16 Dec 15#17
Think of all the porn this would hold
pimpchez
16 Dec 15#16
Any good for installing in a Synology ?
BigYoSpeck
16 Dec 15#15
Other than a 5tb external Toshiba drive I'm not aware of a better £/TB deal at the moment which is really unusual to see at the top end of storage capacity. The sweet spot is usualy floating around the middle of the pack.
kick_u_in_the_nuts
15 Dec 15#14
evry seagate hard disk i had had noisy heads
pantaiema
15 Dec 15#11
Keep in mind 3 years manufacturer warranty (not 1 or 2 years) to give you a piece of mind.
Glix to pantaiema
15 Dec 15#13
Best confirming that once you get it rather than have it fail in a years time only to get told it's a grey market drive so no warranty at all...
alexparx
15 Dec 15#12
WD for me, although I'd always RAID any drive I have nowadays
fatdeeman
15 Dec 15#9
I think I paid this much for a 300gb Maxtor about 10 years ago, had 16mb cache and everything!
polly69
15 Dec 15#8
Free delivery all you need is 20 forum posts.
Dont think its that easy, had my free delivery years but if i remember rightly they cant just be random rubbish posts they have to be of some use, so going on a thread and saying thanks wont do it. Also before you couldn't make all 20 posts the same day so unless its changed you wont be getting free delivery today.
Same as WD anyway.
I have a few Seagate external HDDs, never disappoint me ...
But indeed they use to have a bad batch sold in the market a few years ago.
JimBobJr
15 Dec 151#1
For free delivery all you need is 20 forum posts, easily obtainable in an hour making this only cost £173
pantaiema to JimBobJr
15 Dec 151#3
Thanks for this I have amended the original posting
008 to JimBobJr
15 Dec 152#5
>>>>>
Wish I could make £5.49 in an hour posting replies on HUKD! ;-)
Nice info Jim, thanks
>>>>>
sureshot
15 Dec 152#4
"Seagate brings over 30 years of trusted storage reliability..."
Yeah tell that to Amstrad, whose PC business folded over reliability issues with Seagate HDDs. :stuck_out_tongue:
Although a very good price, personally after my own experiences I wouldn't trust Seagate, never mind with that amount of data.
![Fresh Breakfast Meat Box (Using code) @ Campbells Meat [Haggis / Lorne Sausage / Bacon / Black Pudding & More]](/images/topics/208684_1.jpg)
![[Xbox One] Q. u. b. e: Director's Cut on Deals with Gold](/images/topics/208716_1.jpg)
Opening post
£167.98 + £4.57 = £173.46 Cheapest I have seen so far
" For free delivery all you need is 20 forum posts", easily obtainable in an hour making this only cost £172.99" thanks to JimBobJ in post #1
3 years Manufacturer Warranty.
It is also available same price @ Scan eBay Site
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/like/131567342333?rmvSB=true
Supersized capacity, energy efficiency and lowest TCO
• Seagate brings over 30 years of trusted storage reliability to the growing need for online long-term storage.
• Industry’s best cost/GB/watt 8TB hard drive
• Engineered for 24×7 workloads of 180TB per year
• Drive down costs with up to 1.33TB-per-disk hard drive technology.
• SATA 6Gb/s interface optimizes burst performance
• Seagate AcuTrac™ servo technology delivers dependable performance.
• Free Seagate DiskWizard™ software allows you to install 5TB, 6TB and 8TB hard drives in Windows without UEFI BIOS
• Reliable, low-power data retrieval based on Shingled Magnetic Recording (SMR) technology
• RV-balanced for high density environments
Best-Fit Applications
• Cost-effective online archiving
• Object storage
• Big Data cold storage
• Cloud active archive
• Web-scale archiving
>>>>>
Item data sheet [PDF]
http://www.scan.co.uk/PDFs/Products/64184.pdf
- 008
Top comments
Latest comments (27)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HGST_Deskstar#IBM_Deskstar_75GXP_failures
Currently using Samsung, Western Digital and Seagate HDDs. I have three 1.5GB Seagate HHDs, when I bought them they were failing with clicking errors, Seagate just replaced them with refurbished ones, which cheesed me off, especially as a couple of them still needed replacing a few times to get ones that weren't exhibiting the fault. I was cheesed off as I could have just bought refurbished ones in the first place for probably cheaper.
In particular, the way these drives achieve their high capacity - using Shingled Magnetic Recording (SMR) - is a big problem for RAID arrays. Hard drives can read thinner strips on the platters than they can write, and SMR takes advantage of this by writing overlapping strips, like roof shingles (hence the name). However if you want to change some data, you have to rewrite a whole area, as both the strips before and after the one you want to change get overwritten by the wider write pattern.
If you put these in a standard RAID array and one of them fails, the bad write performance of these drives will make the rebuild take much much longer (the review here shows 57h 13m vs 19h 46m of normal style recording drives). Rebuilding is the most dangerous state a RAID can be in - further failures can mean the complete loss of your data - so you want it to be as quick as possible for the drive.
Basically, if you are just using these for straight backup or storage, not RAID, then you'll be fine. They are also very unsuited to write heavy applications, or lots of random reads (even more so than normal hard drives). For accessing a movie or audio file they'll be absolutely ok.
I'm sure there quite a bit slower when transferring files internally but what difference would it make for daily usage beyond the speed limitation?
John
You're better off with 3, 4, 5 smaller drives in Raid 5 so even if one drive fails you still have all your data. Alternatively use the Parity option in Windows 8/10 Storage Spaces:
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-gb/windows-8/storage-spaces-pools
http://www.howtogeek.com/109380/how-to-use-windows-8s-storage-spaces-to-mirror-combine-drives/
Dont think its that easy, had my free delivery years but if i remember rightly they cant just be random rubbish posts they have to be of some use, so going on a thread and saying thanks wont do it. Also before you couldn't make all 20 posts the same day so unless its changed you wont be getting free delivery today.
I have a few Seagate external HDDs, never disappoint me ...
But indeed they use to have a bad batch sold in the market a few years ago.
Wish I could make £5.49 in an hour posting replies on HUKD! ;-)
Nice info Jim, thanks
>>>>>
Yeah tell that to Amstrad, whose PC business folded over reliability issues with Seagate HDDs. :stuck_out_tongue:
Although a very good price, personally after my own experiences I wouldn't trust Seagate, never mind with that amount of data.