Web Hosting Talk : Web Hosting Main Forums : Colocation and Data Centers : is wd popula than seagate now ?

[ttgt]

Hi,

i know many post talk about which one brand is better,

i know they have their own adherent.


but i just feel that it seems more people use RE3/RE4 for raid server,

and wd black series for general server,

it seems almost i find almost most part of dedicated server provider use wd now,

is it any reason ?


thanx

[Visbits]

RE4 is common for sata and Barracuda owns the SAS market.

I wouldn't call either better, we still fail disk.

[YuriyK]

We had more issues with WD, so try to use Seagates for all the builds. Some customers have their own opinions about it and if they ask we install WDs. Actually personally I am not sure about it, but that's what I hear from the guy who handles all the RMA processes.

[VN-Ken]

We use WD's RE4's and have not had any issues whereas we have had many many drives fail that were Seagates.

Edit: I'd like to also add that unless you're using Caviar Black or the RE series, I would not recommend that you use WD for server production.. ie.. don't use Caviar Blue for a server. Its only the matter of time til' they fail.

[SceneSRV]

We also had more failed Seagates'

[Dave - Just199]

A couple of years ago I preferred seagate over WD but this last year I have seen a higher failure rate on seagate drives and have largely switched back to WD where I am seeing a lower failure rate.

4 years ago I would not touch WD with a 10 foot pole.

[MikeTrike]

I've been a WD RE guy for the last couple of years as well. They have been pretty solid for us.

[(Stephen)]

i have a stack of failed drives from this week only, over 20 drives mostly seagates, a handful of WD and a few samsung.

For my money in SATA enterprise drives, Samsung is where the best reliability was.

I've had a couple fails with them this week even a new drive on setup and testing, and I jokingly threw out that they heard Seagate bought them and had to act like a seagate.