• Hey there, Guest! Share your idea for a new trophy in the forums and win bragging rights and a $100 Amazon gift card! Check out the New Community Trophy Contest here!
  • Pardon our dust as we work on some regularly scheduled forum maintenance. You may notice some missing features during this time. Thank you for your patience!

Seagate and Western Digital Reliability

Which hard drive brand do you think is more reliable for the money?

  • Western Digital

    Votes: 30 40.0%
  • Seagate

    Votes: 40 53.3%
  • Samsung

    Votes: 1 1.3%
  • Fujitsu

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • HITACHI

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Maxtor

    Votes: 3 4.0%
  • IBM

    Votes: 1 1.3%
  • Hewlett-Packard

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Other

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    75
Status
Not open for further replies.

goldragon_70

Distinguished
Jan 13, 2007
731
0
18,980
0
About 8 years ago I heard from a lot of tech that they would swear by Western Digital (especially if you didn’t want to pay for and expensive High end Hard drive), but lately I have been hearing from techs that they've replaced more Western Digitals then any other drive and that they, now, swear by Seagate. I've never owned a Seagate, I have three Western Digitals (all running as main drives) and one of them is at least 8 years old (No problems what so ever), and two Matxors (Only had one issue, and fans solved that). And with customer reviews on retail web sites like Newegg, I find that Western Digital, Seagate, and Hitachi drives tend to have the same Ratio of DOA’s and drives fallers. I would like to know, from the tech community, which HD Company you find more reliable for the Price (in the home user/ work computer side of the market), why do you think they’re more reliable, and what’s your opinion on why these techs complain about replacing more Western Digitals then any other drive?
 

killermedic

Distinguished
Dec 26, 2006
12
0
18,510
0
Wow, first time being first reply. Currently have 6 Raid 0's on 6 machines of my own or Brothers/friends in age from 4 years to 1 month old. 5 of them with Seagates, 1 with Hitachi, and 0 failures from them all (at least till I posted this and cursed myself.)

Medic
 

theworminator

Distinguished
Aug 24, 2006
424
0
18,780
0
I personally trust Seagate more, because they're known to be quality hard drives, and the really sweet 5 year warranty period. You don't offer a longer warranty when your hard drive fails often, it's not economically viable.
 

turtle1

Distinguished
Oct 30, 2006
185
0
18,680
0
Having owned many WD's and a number of Seagate's without ANY issues I believe both companies are producing good products. The only drive I have ever had that failed was a Maxtor (years ago). In three machines I have a Seagate now and at least 2 WD's that are 5 years old I believe and also have a number of newer WD's and Seagates (less than a year old) and all are running fine.
 

altazi

Distinguished
Jan 23, 2007
264
0
18,810
7
It's not scientific, but look at the reviews on Newegg for drives from the various manufacturers. I went with Seagate for my new system; it seemed that there were a larger number of people reporting DOAs or infant failures for the WD drives.
 

sailer

Splendid
Apr 9, 2006
4,969
0
22,810
8
I've used both Seagate and Western digitals for years now, mainly buying whichever was on sale at the time. During the past year, I got a couple DOAs from WD and replaced them with Seagates which ran prefectly. Except for the Raptor, which many people dislike for varying reasons, I prefer Seagate at the moment.

I do have a Raptor and I think its great, but I also believe that its built to a higher general quality or gets a more thorough inspection than the rest of the WD line. May be wrong about that, but its a belief.
 

Scaj

Distinguished
Oct 3, 2007
58
0
18,630
0
Not one single WD drive that I have purchased in the past 20+yrs has failed on me yet, all still work but not in use due to their low capacity. Always use a power supply with enough juice to run your system properly and a WD will never fail on you imho.

Owned only one Seagate (SCSI Ultra160) in my life and it was problematic not being recognized half the time at boot up. I have witnessed the death of one Seagate used in my Brother's comp and I promptly replaced it with a WD which again still operates to this day 10yrs later. My perception of Seagate drives is that they are fast but run hotter than the competition therefore shortening their lifespan and overall reliability.
 

Darkness Flame

Distinguished
Feb 24, 2008
58
0
18,630
0
Well, so far, my family has only had Dells. The current one is about 4 years old, and we had another one that was 6. The older had a Seagate, and I could still turn it on to this day (although, it's gone now, it worked a few months a go before we got rid of it). This one has a Western Digital. Both of which have run perfectly fine.

On another note, I have a Samsung Spinpoint T 500 GB drive in an external enclosure. It doesn't get too hot. Well, except when ambient air temp is near 80F; thing gets toasty, but never shuts off ... I've been using it for over two months and no problems yet. However, from what I've heard, Samsung's Spinpoint F1 series isn't the same. Now, mind you, they are fast, cool, and silent; all of which is excellent. Contrary to all of that, though, they tend to not be as reliable. Also, both Spinpoint T, and even more so on the F1, don't seem to like RAID too much.

Overall, both Seagate and Western Digital are excellent, but I have to go with the later more so; I've heard excellent reviews of the My Book and Passport external drives from them, even after a year of use.
 

Fendulon

Distinguished
Nov 18, 2007
52
0
18,640
3
I have used WD and Seagate all my life, as have my friends and family. I currently have a WD 250gb a 7200.11 250gb Seagate and a 7200.11 1TB from Seagate. All are working well, fast, and quiet. The WD hard drive does run the warmest out of all of them though.
 

andrei3333

Distinguished
Feb 1, 2008
97
0
18,630
0
i have had the seagate barracuda 7200.7 8mb cache 80GB in my old system since 2004 or so and transferred it over to my new build 2 months ago and put it along side the new barracuda 7200.11 32mb cache 500gb and o problems ever, no clicking, no noise, excellent performance

go with seagate's new drives
 

SirCrono

Distinguished
Sep 9, 2006
457
0
18,780
0
I'm having deja vu, it's like the tenth time I see this question posted, and again I feel obliged to vote and comment on how a WD has never failed on me or anyone I know or heard of.
Granted the new seagates are faster, but in reliability and noise levels WD has no competition.

I'd like to add that I've only seen 2 hard drives fail in my entire life, one was a samsung and the other was a Seagate, but I don't count the seagate as failing because it was after it survived a fire that leveled the house to the ground, it happened to a friend o mine and he still could get his data back (mostly porn I might add).
 

sailer

Splendid
Apr 9, 2006
4,969
0
22,810
8


Funny that you should mention the IBM Deskstar. I had one and transfered it through three computers before it was just too small to be useful anymore. It was a bit noisy, but never died from use.
 

VoRogue

Distinguished
Feb 6, 2007
24
0
18,510
0
In the past 3 years I have had two disk drive failures. One WD was noisy and a Seagate became unreliable on spin up when cold. The Seagate was outside the retailers warrenty but inside the Seagate Warrenty and they replaced it quickly and painlessly.

Overall at the moment I prefer the Seagates as they seem quieter.
 

slim142

Distinguished
Jan 29, 2006
2,704
0
20,780
0
Seagates have been FAILING a lot in the last months. Personally I will try to avoid OEM (barebone) Seagates because I had a lot of problems with it.

Maxtor has been perfect for me. Western Digital with its raptor has also been nice. Samsung.... Heard good but also bad stuff.
 

goldragon_70

Distinguished
Jan 13, 2007
731
0
18,980
0


I have a Deskstar and a Quntam from IBM, I have been using them in computer just so I can play around with a few different versions of linux, and the quntam is finally dieing, but the Deskstar is still working.

I Put IBM in the poll, because I happen to know a few people who still like the Old IBM drives.
 

arkadi

Distinguished
Mar 5, 2008
395
0
18,810
11
WD and Seagate are the best for me, some models better than others, make sure you get HD with 5 years warranty. One thing for sure Hitachi and Samsung disappoints me more than others.
 

sunny27

Distinguished
Apr 3, 2007
267
0
18,790
2
i always prefer seagate.owned 4 of them since 1996.used samsung once-its simply crap!! i've got a hitachi drive too for about 7 months now-no issues yet.
 

snarfies1

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
226
0
18,680
0
I got my first PC in 1991, it had an 83mb (no, not gb) Seagate. I wound up giving the drive to a friend for use in his Commodore Amiga 2000 (!), and it still works to this day.

I'm a little less trustful of WD drives - they went through a period were the quality wasn't so great, and I lost two WD drives in a row in under a year. That was a long time ago though. WD seems to have its act back together, but... I am currently using a pair of WD drives in my eSATA RAID. No issues yet.
 

rattman169

Distinguished
Sep 8, 2006
357
0
18,810
16
I have personally worked with all harddrives on the market, I was a service technician for a large computer company, I am a network administrator and have used all drives still. Not to say anything bad about any drives but look at a Seagate drive or Hitachi, is says on them they can take 10G's of force before they stop working, WD says 100G's of force before unusable. I have had several drives returned to me for RMA, most were fujitsu, then maxtor, next would be seagate then WD, Hitachi would be up there with Fujitsu/Maxtor level. Not to say anything wrong with any drives but to prove a point several of these drives were dropped from 3', 6' and 8'. The seagate worked up till the 8' mark, WD never stopped working, just started making noise, all the other drives stopped working after fisrt drop from 3'. Hop this helps in deciding factors when selecting drives
 

rforce

Distinguished
Nov 26, 2007
61
0
18,640
4
As a data recovery technician, I find this to be the million dollar question. Seagate definitely seems to have the upper hand on the market, but I've been seeing 500GB Seagate drives coming in after only being used for a couple of weeks. But, that being said, I've seen a lot of 500GB Western Digital drives that are in very rough shape.

With all that in mind, we see them all come in for failures. If you want stability, buy SCSI or SAS. If you want volume and low price, buy PATA or SATA. The brand really doesn't make much difference, in my mind. I suppose that Seagate's 5 year warranty will help a bit.
 

TeraMedia

Distinguished
Jan 26, 2006
904
0
18,990
3
I've had 2 Deathstars fail - one on my laptop and one on my father's. Both Dells, and both died soon after the laptop warranties ran out. To be fair, my laptop had suffered a high-G impact a few months before failure, and my father runs his laptop as a slideshow 24x7.

I've also had a WD RAID drive disconnect from the array after I moved, but it has since apparently stabilized to the new climate. That drive is 1 of 6 running in an HTPC 24x7 since 11/2005.
 

inglburt

Distinguished
Oct 24, 2007
116
0
18,680
0
I was WD exclusive for years. Then I started hearing rumblings about the new drives being manufactured in new plants/different countries, and having bad bearings in their mid sized hdd's (80 gigs). Well, about a year later I noticed that my harddrive was getting pretty noisy so I RMA'd it. Started buying Seagate. Never had any more problems with any of my WD's. And never had any problems with my Seagates. (The oldest seagate being about 5 now) I just went back to WD (server class) in my latest build. My oldest WD that is in use is about 7-8 years old.
Bottom line, so far I have had 4 bad hard drive, a Samsung 6.4gb, 2 IBM's 20gb's, and a WD 80gb with noisy bearings. I think both companies are doing well. Wd's are just a little bit faster for the most part.
 

aevm

Illustrious
I've always bought WD for home, since 1994, usually because they were cheaper and because reviews said they were quieter. For some reason, wherever I worked, I've always got Seagates. Either way, they all worked fine for a few years and then they were dumped in favor of something newer and much bigger. I'll probably keep buying WD myself, but I'd vote for Seagate too if the poll allowed it.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads