PAST 30 DAYS

LOWEST PRICE

In Desktop Internal Hard Drives

-Light, runs very cool, 32-36°C during intense R/W disk initialization hours on end. -Mind-blowing $/GB/Performance value (SAS) over SATA versions of these drives, especially since you can get a SAS HBA for dirt cheap. -The SAS versions are $235 cheaper than SATA at this time. You can get a SAS HBA with the money you saved by buying just 1 drive!

So far the drive seem to be functioning well, ask again in 6 monthd

Good price 12gb interface Works well so far in my Adaptec raid 5

SAS connection and instruction set. ES.3 is a good improvement. Fast and reliable. I am using these and the 1TB versions in a SAN environment and have had good success.

5 year warranty with data recovery. BackBlaze recommended as low failure rate Excellent price-per-terabyte but only when on sale.

Ran 4 of these in a storage array for a few years. They replaced a similar array built on smaller SATA drives. Needless to say, they're muuuuch faster than the SATA drives.

Good size. Good specs. Good price. No problems yet.

Perfect hard drive for backing up my SSD. Not nearly as fast as my SSD but still plenty fast for a mechanical drive. 64mb cache really makes this drive perform well. Just as fast or even maybe a bit faster than my WD Black. The weight tells me this is a solid drive. This 500GB is thinner but quite a bit heavier than my WD Black drive - heavy to me is good -- good bearings and mechanicals should weigh more. SATA 6 interface on my ASUS motherboard gives me max read/write speeds around 200mbs. Good heat dissipation - during benchmarking drive stayed 35c or lower. This was the perfect size for imaging my SSD. I have a 480GB SSD as my main drive. I like to keep an image because when your SSD goes, there is no recovery. Even though the SSD should be bullet proof with no moving parts, I have found over the years that the MTBF for SSDs seems to be no better and maybe even worse than mechanical hard drives.

Fit very well into my Cooler Master HAF-912. Moving files is decently easy and fast.

These work wonderfully with my Synology NAS!

Pros: The Seagate Ironwolf 16 TB HDD is spacious, robust for a platter drive, and dense with a cache of 256 MB and a speed of 7,200 RPM on a typical SATA III power and data connection. You can really tell the platters are packed tight as this drive is a couple pounds or at least feels like it. Upon formatting in a Windows 10 x64 machine, this drive offers 14.5 TB usable. While this drive is intended for a NAS environment, I always utilize drives in a JBOD environment with manual RAID 1 so as to be more selective over data. On power-up, this drive is significantly louder than others I’ve owned, probably due to the seek arm aligning; however it presents no issue after a couple seconds. Reads: This Ironwolf drive performed surprisingly well in all read tests I ran on it. Utilizing HDTune, speeds started around 270 MB/sec and eventually fell to 125 MB/sec at the end of the platter structure. Access time was in the 14-16ms range with CPU utilization of 8-9% on a 7940X (14-core) system. Bursts were nearly at 500 MB/sec, however the cache fills quickly on a large transfer. Placing photography work on this new drive, it’s performed very well, and while not at the speed of an SSD, the cache helps to speed up short term data. This makes it feel at times like an SSD since my particular work is serial. Manually upping the queue / threads beyond 2 starts to make any performance metrics dip seemingly square to the amount of requests, though giving this drive many small files makes performance quite impacted. For an as-expected NAS environment though, most users are requesting a mix of files or larger transfers and I saw no issue with that given an expected performance drop. In Crystal DiskMark x64, this meant a sequential read of again, over 200 MB/sec; around 230. Yet any 4K data (where traditional HDDs struggle) relegated this drive to sub-2 MB/sec performance. As usual, if you need high performance on many tiny files, go SSD / NVMe. Writes: The writes on this drive proved similar to the read levels. Transfers start off fast, reaching around 250 MB/sec at the start of the platter, then falling in toothed fashion down to 125 MB/sec at the end. Bursts clocked in just under 300 MB/sec for writes which is very impressive for a platter drive. Access time was about 5-6ms, with identical CPU usage. Crystal DiskMark x64 echoed similar results as above, with writes reaching a generalized 250 MB/sec, yet at 4 KB file size, falling to 2.5 MB/sec. In sending over large amounts of data to this new working drive (over 5 TB), I saw the cache benefit greatly with video files and other large pieces of data, far exceeding typical transfer rates. Sometimes I’d see bursts to this drive at over 1 GB/sec, holding for a few, then moving down to the 200 MB/sec range so it simply depends on what you’re writing to this drive in terms of file make up to accurately gauge performance.