HDD still ok?

[Tempest]

I need an external hard drive to store large 4K video files. I would like to have an SSD but I need at least 2TB and they are a bit expensive, and the more I read about them, they still have problems, like dynamic cache, actual storage being significantly less than advertised storage, and occasional failure. Are large capacity HDDs still acceptable for storage? It is very hard to tell judging from the reviews on Amazon. It seems that every brand has some terrible reviews.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

HGST 8TB 7200rpm SATA HDD
$140
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08W1PRTNJ

[icehat]

why would you need flash memory for storing large contiguous files? 7200RPM mechanical disks can usually (or almost) saturate whatever bus they're attached to

hard drives are still fine for that purpose, just checksum/verify the files periodically to detect bitrot/bad sectors

[Tempest]

Thanks. That's all the advice I needed to go with HDD over SSD. I went ahead and bought a 5TB HDD from Seagate for ~$100.

[Illusion of Progress]

If it's largely for storage and you have a need for a lot of space (I'd classify this as 2 TB or 4 TB or more due to SSDs being slimmer in choice and far more expensive starting at these points), then hard drives are ideal for this because you get many times the capacity for a given price, and performance isn't as important for the role of storage so you're sort of trading off capacity for something that doesn't matter to go with an SSD. Even 5,400 RPM drives are fine here (at least the ones I have that I bought around a year ago are, being faster than the older 7,200 RPM drives they replaced).

It might be a nice luxury to have a super fast drive like an SSD for storage if you have either deep funds or low storage needs and can thus do it, but otherwise it's not worth spending around four times as much (or losing around four times the capacity) compared to an HDD. HDDs are even fine for the majority of games (just having longer load times) so for most storage needs where random access times aren't super important, it is of course something they are fine for.

[Cathulhu]

If it's just a data storage, a HDD is fine.

[#Tweek SHm0NESY]

норм

[A&A]

HDD for this type of work is a good investment idea.

I recommend you buy a hard drive from Seagate.

https://www.newegg.com/seagate-barracuda-st2000dm008-2tb/p/N82E16822184773

[Andrius227]

They are ok if you can tolerate the noise. I use 5400rpm hdds in my nas, which is sitting in a cupboard, and they are still a bit too noisy for my liking.

[Der tüddelige Fußgänger]

good for large files. Like storing terrabytes of 4k videos.
But bad for gaming, since they load very slow. And some games, can microstutter when installed on an hdd, but it depends on the game

[Tempest]

Thanks guys. I'm learning a lot about storage as I go. I was concerned about the failure rate and slow loading times but you can't have everything. How can a 5400 rpm drive be faster than a 7200 rpm drive? Seagate advertises a data recovery service that is free for the first year. One reviewer said he couldn't read the serial number because it was smudged and that prevented him from being able to register the product. But every drive had an occasional terrible review like that.

[Illusion of Progress]

Originally posted by A&A (Razor Six-Four):

HDD for this type of work is a good investment idea.

I recommend you buy a hard drive from Seagate.

https://www.newegg.com/seagate-barracuda-st2000dm008-2tb/p/N82E16822184773

Not a fan of this one. Not because of brand (though I admit a partiality towards Western Digital over Seagate) but because it has SMR. I realize that might sound backwards because SMR shouldn't matter much for reads but instead can massively impact writes, which isn't how most storage drives are used, but I do tend to write to them a bit. I'd personally take a 5,400 RPM non-SMR drive instead. Capacities for that model seem to top out at 3 TB anyway (not saying there aren't storage needs for the 2 TB to 3 TB sizes but they drop to 5,400 RPM above this because that's fine for large capaciy drives which are mostly used for storage).

Pretty sure the 1 TB model of that drive is the one my sister has in her PC as a system drive and good riddance, Windows 10 on the thing is slower than anything I've probably used.

Originally posted by Tempest:

I was concerned about the failure rate and slow loading times but you can't have everything.

Failure rates are an interesting thing to delve into. As an external drive, just ensure it's not moved during operation, and if it is transported, be careful with it.

Load times as in... programs and games? I wouldn't recommend a 5,400 RPM drive for common programs nor heavy games. Use a 7,200 RPM HDD or an SSD for those. 5,400 RPM drives are good for storage and/or uses where access times aren't a major limitation, and namely where you need larger capacities and cost of a 7,200 RPM drive or SSD would make the cost difference becomes a factor.

Originally posted by Tempest:

How can a 5400 rpm drive be faster than a 7200 rpm drive?

In a vacuum, it's not. Sorry for the confusion.

However, other factors come into play like platter density, cache sizes and techniques, and things like SMR which can have impacts on certain use-cases, and probably other things I'm not aware of. I was moving from old Blue (Caviar SE renamed, actually) 640 GB 7,200 RPM AAKS drives, which were somewhat fast for their time (late 2000s) to 4 TB 5,400 RPM Blue drives. If you're comparing drives from today, like for like, 7,200 RPM will always be faster, but things aren't always like for like.

I should also clarify that they might not, per benchmarks, be faster all around, but I do remember running Crystal Disk on both of them and being surprised at the 5,400 RPM drives numbers on some things (even compared to my Black), and in "real world use" it felt no slower despite the slower rotational speed.

So sorry for the confusion, it was less about saying "5,400 RPM can be faster" as it was "don't let 5,400 RPM scare you into thinking it's not good enough" because I had that initial uncertainty as well but 7,200 RPM non-SMR drives are just far more limited in options (and price) once you start reaching 4 TB and above or so.

Originally posted by Tempest:

Seagate advertises a data recovery service that is free for the first year. One reviewer said he couldn't read the serial number because it was smudged and that prevented him from being able to register the product. But every drive had an occasional terrible review like that.

As you said, with a sample size large enough, you'll increasingly find bad feedback for anything.

Unfortunate situation for that reviewer, though, but I wouldn't weigh that against Seagate or a given drive in particular.

[Heretic]

For a decently priced CMR the Toshiba x300 is worth a look. Most CMR today end up as NAS drives.

[Tempest]

I think the one I just bought has SMR. It should be ok. I'm just storing the videos basically and maybe some ROMs for pinball as backup. My concern is that after the drive is over 50% full with tons of videos, if I want to watch a particular video, will it take forever for the library to load before I can see the file available to select? I'll find out.

[Out Of Bubblegum]

Originally posted by Tempest:

Are large capacity HDDs still acceptable for storage?

Yes. I have several 10TB drives filled with DVD and BluRay images. And a couple of 2TB and 4TB ones. From when we had video stores. They are fine after years of just being stored in a drawer.

[Tempest]

That's good to hear. I read that HDDs need to be lubricated or something like that and they can die just sitting there unused. But I guess sometimes they last many years so that's good.