Download the Tom's Hardware App from the App Store
The reference for current tech news
Yes No

Study: A Look At Hard Drive Reliability In Russia

by

Storelab, a Russian player in data recovery, recently released a long-term study comparing hard drives from a number of different vendors. The controversial report offers interesting data and provides a snapshot of HDD reliability and defect reasons.

Reliability is hardly what consumers think most about when they decide to buy a storage product. Capacity, price, and speed receive most of the attention. The fact of the matter is that reliability is just assumed. This makes potential customers an easy target for marketing departments.

Furthermore, few people actually know what specific hard drive they get when buying an OEM PC because vendors tend to screen the identities of individual components. Many customers also get lulled into a false sense of security by warranty periods. A five-year warranty does not guarantee five years without hard drive failure, it just means you get a new drive should it actually fail. Statistical surveys of hard drive reliability are as rare as independent, long-term tests, but we found at least some insight through this analysis that we're discussing today.

Practical Relevance and General Validity

The Russian company Storelab, an Eastern European market leader in professional data recovery, is known for analysis and professional guidance published on its website. Storelab recently published the results of a long-term study based on its own operations and the observed failure rates of certain hard drives from leading manufacturers.

Storelab found some interesting results, and although the study is not large or scientific enough, it provides a useful insight into the hard drive market. While the hard drives from one manufacturer lasted 3.5 years on average, comparable models in capacity, features, and price from another manufacturer only lasted 1.5 years. Consumers might "only" lose their home photos and video (no small event when it means a decade of memories erased), but in the commercial sector, unexpectedly high failures can paralyze companies and destroy months of work. Even if safety measures have been taken to secure the data, premature drive failures mean increased costs due to labor, replacement, and interrupted operations. For these reasons, Storelab decided to publicly evaluate the failure data it had collected in order to demonstrate which manufacturer reaches the lowest failure rates.

We want to point out that Storelab's data consists exclusively of hard drives sent in for data recovery. This says nothing about the total number of claims handled directly by the retailer or manufacturer. But it does allow for detailed analysis of actual errors. It also needs to be said that drives sent in for data recovery have not necessarily been treated badly. An advantage of this analysis is the long-term factor, which usually only plays a minor role in market statistical surveys. With this all in mind, let's take a close look at the company's results!

Share:
11
Comments
X
Submit

Comments
Read the comments on the forums
mi1ez 13/08/2010 09:03
Hide
-1+

Quote :The majority of all hard drives sold worldwide are produced by just six manufacturers: Fujitsu/Toshiba, Hitachi, Samsung, Seagate, and Western Digital.

Erm... That's 5...

hollett 13/08/2010 10:36
Hide
-1+

These figures are totally irrelevant. you can not compair the drives sent in to be representitive of the market. For example the people who use data recoverty services are not the owners of low cost computers but more likly to be enterprise drives. WD do not even manufature SAS drives, while Seagate are the market leader in this area, so this would explain the large disparity in the figures.

mi1ez 13/08/2010 10:53
Hide
-1+

Quote :These drives operated for an average of five years, at least half a year longer than those of Western Digital.
Graph shows 1.5years. 3.5years and 5years gives 1.5years difference.

smalltime0 13/08/2010 17:05
Hide
-1+

mi1ez :
Erm... That's 5...


I'm guessing Tom's is counting Toshiba and Fujitsu as seperate as they were 5 years ago when this trial was seems to have started.

Anonymous 15/08/2010 17:08
Hide
-3+

Interestingly, the Air Jordan shoe suffers from a high rate of spindle slip and a resultant electromagnetic dither that is reproducible in the lab.

Is this what you were getting at sssooo?

Or are you just a worthless spammer?

astrowhiz 17/08/2010 12:52
Hide
-1+

hollett - the Seagate 7200.## series aren't SAS drives. All the drives in the survey are consumer devices. I would guess that if storelab had included enterprise and network storage specific drives they could have made the sample size much larger.
Strangely enough Seagates enterprise HD's are excellent products I've found. Maybe the two divisions need some tech sharing.

hollett 18/08/2010 22:27
Hide
-0+

@ Astrowhiz. The total sales figures they use don't specify if they include just consumer or all drives. So I would assume all drives. Also Seagate 7200 NS is a popular Tier 2 or Near Line Storage SATA drive. Although the firmware on the 7200.10 was shocking.

Solitaire 19/08/2010 14:46
Hide
-0+

Wheee!! If Toms aren't shilling Hitachi like the world was about to end then they're really not picking good articles to hint at any concept of impartiality :o

Annoying Fact: Drives sent to data recovery firms are not there for a holiday. Their users have mission-critical data on them that needs to be retrieved, and its not cheap. Not one bit. Therefore the bulk of 3.5" drives and quite a few 2.5" drives going through such a company will be enterprise or server drives which have feck-all to do with standard desktop models. So this article has no bearing on regular users.

Except to shill Hitachi drives, that is.

Amusing footnote: Through experience in the industry, in the domestic space the F1 and particularly F3 drive lines from Samsung seem least failure prone. WD on the other hand are pretty bad, especially with older and higher-capacity drives. And Hitachi's newer high-capacity 3.5" HDDs are the worst of the lot, with a good few enthusiasts who went on Hitachi's brand name getting burned big-time :o

tritono9 19/08/2010 21:37
Hide
-0+

wow, I have three 1 TB WD Caviar Black and tomorrow I will need to buy another. 4 TB of WD. I just wish that this HDs dont fail because I work with media and I have huge storage files... f*ck, wish me luck. The good thing is that I never had a problem with my HDs, I have two for like two years now. :\

Anonymous 24/08/2010 15:05
Hide
-0+

Seriously? "Let's take a look at HD reliability in *Russia*" ?

Coming next week. an intimate examination of whether users in Outer Mongolia prefer MS or Logitech mice.

Obviously filling your quota of articles there......

Best offers

Newsletters


OK