Expired Hot Deals

NCIX

Seagate Barracuda ST4000DM005 4T $129.99

  • Last Updated:
  • Feb 12th, 2017 3:06 pm
[OP]
Sr. Member
Oct 2, 2013
832 posts
205 upvotes

[NCIX] Seagate Barracuda ST4000DM005 4T $129.99

Just saw this in today's extreme deal, maybe the cheapest 4TB HDD I've seen so far
Newegg Canada has it for 159.99
Newegg US has it for 128.99

Comes with 2 years warranty, not sure of its reliability
81 replies
Deal Guru
Apr 17, 2003
10643 posts
7227 upvotes
I worry when the manufacturer doesn't even have a 5-year warranty on their drives...it says something about their confidence level on their products.
Jr. Member
Aug 9, 2016
111 posts
49 upvotes
Most manufacturers only give 2 or 3 year warranties now. They usually offer 5 years for enterprise drives, which obviously are more expensive and reliable.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Dec 10, 2006
1486 posts
343 upvotes
Edmonton, AB
How much was this at memory express a few days ago? $130 or $140. Can't find the post anymore. :/
Jr. Member
Nov 9, 2006
186 posts
40 upvotes
Ontario
CyniC- wrote: How much was this at memory express a few days ago? $130 or $140. Can't find the post anymore. :/
139.99, and it was 129.99 at newegg with 5.99 shipping.
Deal Fanatic
Nov 15, 2013
5508 posts
3627 upvotes
Toronto
chatbox wrote: I worry when the manufacturer doesn't even have a 5-year warranty on their drives...it says something about their confidence level on their products.
Not really, the longer a drive is in operation, the more likely it will fail and all drives, even the best of the lot show a certain defect rate at all points of their life cycle. A shorter warranty is a cost saving thing, not a product confidence thing.
Jr. Member
Apr 22, 2010
164 posts
93 upvotes
Jep4444 wrote: Not really, the longer a drive is in operation, the more likely it will fail and all drives, even the best of the lot show a certain defect rate at all points of their life cycle. A shorter warranty is a cost saving thing, not a product confidence thing.
That is dismissive of a good point, and I think you misunderstand what "confidence" means for a company.

If you're not looking at warranty, you're making a mistake. Either way you look at it, the consumer is getting less with a shorter warranty. If the manufacturer thinks the drive is really good, it's going to have a long warranty reflecting that reliability (or offsetting a disaster). Cost savings / confidence is the same thing.

I assume you look at the warranty length, the same as everyone else, so why complain about about an RFD person bringing up a valid point?

Here's PCMag's 2017 ratings. http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400958,00.asp

quote for you: "Warranty length is also a big factor in our ratings: Drives can and will fail. That cheap drive you found on a deal site may only come with a one-year warranty. Look for a three- or five-year warranty if you're hard on your drives."
Deal Fanatic
Nov 15, 2013
5508 posts
3627 upvotes
Toronto
mrmalten wrote: That is completely unhelpful and dismissive of a good point.

If you're not looking at warranty, you're making a mistake. Either way you look at it, the consumer is getting less with a shorter warranty. If the manufacturer thinks the drive is really good, it's going to have a long warranty reflecting that reliability (or offsetting a disaster).

Cost savings / confidence is the same thing. A 3 year warranty says the failure rate will exceed acceptable loss levels for periods over 3 years (ie the drive is more likely to fail). In the past the standard was 5 years and they still have 5 years on enterprise drives. It comes down to saying the expected life of the product is statistically shorter, or they simply don't want to stand behind the product for as long. 3 years is better than many external drives, which often only get 1 year.

Here's PCMag's 2017 ratings. http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400958,00.asp

quote for you: "Warranty length is also a big factor in our ratings: Drives can and will fail. That cheap drive you found on a deal site may only come with a one-year warranty. Look for a three- or five-year warranty if you're hard on your drives."
But to say it's indicative of a higher failure rate is not actually true. More often than not, if a drive lives through the first year, it's going to follow a normal failure curve anyways(ie most drives have a pretty common failure rate per year of their life). You're just inferring that if a drive has a shorter warranty, it's going to be more prone to failure. The funny thing about the analysis you linked me to is that most(if not all) of those drives are from 2 manufacturers anyways. But more importantly, if a drive costs 20% more for a 2 year longer warranty, that is significantly above the failure percentage of even the worst hard drives. One would be better off with more cheaper drives than less more expensive drives(for the same cost) despite the longer warranties. That was actually the premise that started BlackBlaze's practices and they still claim they have saved money by purchasing drives as cheaply as possible vs getting the best possible drives. Not that I think their testing is very useful(because failure rate in specified situations is hard to extrapolate to real world data), but the cost analysis is fairly empirical.
Deal Addict
Dec 30, 2008
4038 posts
786 upvotes
Windsor
Are these suitable for NAS at all or would that be too risky?
Deal Fanatic
Nov 15, 2013
5508 posts
3627 upvotes
Toronto
G77 wrote: Are these suitable for NAS at all or would that be too risky?
There is no empirical evidence that these are bad drives. How many drives do you plan to run and in what kind of RAID setup? I'm more of the mind that buying cheaper drives and self insuring is more effective than relying on warranties and lengthy RMA processes only to be sent a refurbished drive anyways. The odds of a failure in most drives is still in the single digits and the odds of multiple drive failures in short proximity is really quite low, that said, I prefer to diversify my drives by type to avoid the possibility of batch failure.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Aug 23, 2004
9179 posts
2155 upvotes
London
G77 wrote: Are these suitable for NAS at all or would that be too risky?
One of the drives inside my DS413 is this seagate and has been in there for a while without problems.
Last edited by apvm on Feb 9th, 2017 10:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
Jr. Member
Sep 25, 2012
129 posts
35 upvotes
Vaughan
my one complaint with this specific drive is that the spindle speed is not listed but people have been saying it s a 5900 rpm drive
Deal Expert
Oct 6, 2005
16730 posts
2408 upvotes
G77 wrote: Are these suitable for NAS at all or would that be too risky?
Works fine in RAID; good price too.

I need like 5, but only have money for 2 :(
arandomguy wrote: Just a heads up this is a SMR drive.
This is a PMR drive (regular hard drive). This is NOT a SMR drive.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Dec 31, 2007
2405 posts
392 upvotes
Thornhill
When it comes to warranty, there are things that some people do that they shouldn't as well that can reflect on the total amount of defects. For me the number one is shipping, how many drives are shipped and not protected properly? This has been the number one failure for me in terms of drive failures, Amazon has it right, and lately so does Newegg, all bare/oem drives I've had shipped by them have been shipped with proper HD boxes. Moving a computer while the system is running can also cause issues, issues of proper ventilation etc. are others. Any drive can fail, that's why when I read 1/2 of the reviews online I take them with a grain of salt... and for me personally, I don't care too much about the warranty, if I have ANY personal information on a drive that fails that I can totally not wipe properly, I'm not sending it back for warranty repair anyway, just they way I do business.

Saying all this, seems like a good price for a 4TB drive...
Sr. Member
Dec 26, 2011
708 posts
296 upvotes
coolspot wrote: This is a PMR drive (regular hard drive). This is NOT a SMR drive.
I'm skeptical because it is a 3 platter drive, that is over 1 TB/platter in terms of density. The exact same density as their Archive drives.

Seagate Barracuda ST4000DM005 -
http://www.seagate.com/www-content/prod ... 04656b.pdf

Seagate Archive Drive specs/manual - http://www.seagate.com/www-content/prod ... 43737d.pdf

It also used the same term of "TGMR recording technology" for both. Whereas their other manuals will specify perpendicular.
Deal Expert
Oct 6, 2005
16730 posts
2408 upvotes
arandomguy wrote: I'm skeptical because it is a 3 platter drive, that is over 1 TB/platter in terms of density. The exact same density as their Archive drives.

Good point, however, performance is quite good on this drive ... so even if it were SMR, I haven't seen any limitations :)
Deal Fanatic
Nov 15, 2013
5508 posts
3627 upvotes
Toronto
arandomguy wrote: I'm skeptical because it is a 3 platter drive, that is over 1 TB/platter in terms of density. The exact same density as their Archive drives.

Seagate Barracuda ST4000DM005 -
http://www.seagate.com/www-content/prod ... 04656b.pdf

Seagate Archive Drive specs/manual - http://www.seagate.com/www-content/prod ... 43737d.pdf

It also used the same term of "TGMR recording technology" for both. Whereas their other manuals will specify perpendicular.
IMO, the concerns over SMR drives are a little blown out of proportion. Their only real impact on performance is sustained write speeds which most people don't have to worry about on a regular basis. Considering the typical user is probably using these as media storage anyways. I don't think it's particularly a big deal. For those that have more specific needs, such as a lot of frequent archival, I can see it being an issue but I doubt most will ever even notice, outside of transferring a massive amount of files from one drive to another(which most people don't do more than a couple times over the life of a drive).

Top

Thread Information

There is currently 1 user viewing this thread. (0 members and 1 guest)