[HN Gopher] Testing two 18 TB white label SATA hard drives from ...
___________________________________________________________________
Testing two 18 TB white label SATA hard drives from datablocks.dev
https://web.archive.org/web/20251006052340/https://ounapuu.e...
Author : thomasjb
Score : 122 points
Date : 2025-10-06 09:36 UTC (5 days ago)
(HTM) web link (ounapuu.ee)
(TXT) w3m dump (ounapuu.ee)
| econ wrote:
| OT
|
| > Half of tech YouTube has been sponsored by companies like...
|
| It just struck me that the product reviews are a part of the
| social realm that is barely explored.
|
| Imagine a video website like TikTok or YouTube etc where all
| videos are organized under products. Priority to those who
| purchased the product and a category ranked by how many similar
| products you've purchased.
|
| The thing sort of exists currently in some hard to find corner of
| TEMU etc but there are no channels or playlists.
| Aurornis wrote:
| The reason you don't see videos arranged by product is because
| everyone knows not to trust unknown creators telling you how
| great a product is.
|
| Viewers want to see opinions from specific people they've come
| to trust, not the first video that comes up for a product.
| aspenmayer wrote:
| Coincidentally or not, those folks who have more subscribers
| usually charge more for their consideration. That's why I
| generally trust Steve of Gamers Nexus more than other folks,
| because they don't do ads except for promoting their own
| products, so there's no conflict of interest. On the one
| hand, Gamers Nexus doesn't manufacture their own hard drives,
| but on the other, they publish their methodology and have a
| reputation to uphold, so I would trust their judgement
| regarding testing computer hardware more than folks who do
| engage in outside advertising.
| markerz wrote:
| Alternatively, unknown creators have less incentive to
| falsely promote or lie. It's the reason I tend to trust
| random strangers on Reddit than popular YouTubers who have
| achieved monetization and sponsorship.
| econ wrote:
| They don't have to tell you anything. Just unbox and show
| what they got.
|
| I just purchased a bicycle chain cleaning device. It was
| absurdly cheap. The plastic was extruded poorly, it was hard
| to assemble, it was not entirely obvious how to use it.
| However! It did the job and it barely got dirty. I expected
| it to be full of rusty oil both inside and outside but it
| accumulated just a tiny smudge on the inlet. If anyone made a
| video it would be a fantastic product.
| noAnswer wrote:
| 1. You could be that anyone.
|
| 2. The world is filled to the brim with videos about
| "fantastic products".
| ghostly_s wrote:
| God, the flood of absolutely useless "review" videos Amazon
| has incentivized customers to shit all over their site
| which are nothing more than unboxings are the worst thing
| about that ecosystem. No thank you.
| 9dev wrote:
| I don't trust big channels _especially_ , because I assume
| they have just sold themselves out to the biggest sponsor.
| Influencers only exist due to campaign deals, where companies
| try to sneak their ads into your mind by abusing your
| inclination to trust another human being. All of it is
| sickening.
|
| In comparison, I'd rather read a general review magazine with
| a long history. At least they don't try to trick me into
| believing they are working out of the goodness of their
| hearts, and they usually aren't married to a single big
| sponsor.
|
| Online reviews are broken beyond repair.
| ghostly_s wrote:
| >I'd rather read a general review magazine with a long
| history.
|
| Do any of these still exist?
| numpad0 wrote:
| There's Kakaku.com[1] in Japanese Internet for all consumer
| electronics, Minkara for cars, bookmeter.com for books, and
| 5ch.net as fallback. It's surprising that there's only
| Goodreads on English Internet that everyone have heard of...
|
| 1: https://review.kakaku.com/review/K0001682323/ |
| https://review-kakaku-com.translate.goog/review/K0001682323/...
| speedgoose wrote:
| I admire the courage to store data on refurbished Seagate hard
| drives. I prefer SSD storage with some backups using cloud cold
| storage, because I'm not the one replacing the failing hard
| drives.
| stirlo wrote:
| And I prefer to have a healthy bank account balance.
|
| Storing 18TB (let alone with raid) on SSDs is something only
| those earning Silicon Valley tech wages can afford.
| patrakov wrote:
| Not really. I know that my sleep is worth more than the
| difference between HDD and SSD prices, and I know the
| difference between the failure rates and the headache caused
| by the RMA process, so I buy SSDs.
|
| In essence, what we together are saying is that people with
| super-sensitive sleep that are also easily upset, and that
| don't have ultra-high salaries, cannot really afford 18 TB of
| data (even though they can afford an HDD), and that's true.
| gambiting wrote:
| Well, again, well done on being able to afford it. I have
| 24TB array on cheap second hand drives from CEX for about
| PS100 each, using DrivePool - and guess what, if one of
| them dies I'll just buy another PS100 second hand drive.
| But also guess what - in the 6 years I had this setup, all
| of these are still in good condition. Paying for SSDs
| upfront would have been a gigantic financial mistake(imho).
| jabart wrote:
| Every drive is "used" the moment you turn it on.
| malfist wrote:
| There's a big difference between used as in I just bought
| this hard drive and have used it for a week in my home
| server, and used as in refurbished drive after years of hard
| labor in someone else's server farm
| deodar wrote:
| Drive failure rate versus age is a U-shaped curve. I
| wouldn't distrust a used drive with healthy performance and
| SMART parameters.
|
| And you should use some form of redundancy/backups anyway.
| It's also a good idea to not use all disks from the same
| batch to avoid correlated failures.
| kklimonda wrote:
| datablocks.dev has a page explaining what white label and
| recertified disks are [1]. Those are not disks used for
| years under heavy load.
|
| 1: https://datablocks.dev/blogs/news/white-label-vs-
| recertified...
| jabart wrote:
| Enterprise drives are way different than anything consumer
| based. I wouldn't trust a consumer drive used for 2 years,
| but a true enteprise drive has like millions of hours left
| of it's life.
|
| Quote from Toshiba's paper on this. [1]
|
| Hard disk drives for enterprise server and storage usage
| (Enterprise Performance and Enterprise Capacity Drives)
| have MTTF of up to 2 million hours, at 5 years warranty,
| 24/7 operation. Operational temperature range is limited,
| as the temperature in datacenters is carefully controlled.
| These drives are rated for a workload of 550TB/year, which
| translates into a continuous data transfer rate of 17.5
| Mbyte/s[3]. In contrast, desktop HDDs are designed for
| lower workloads and are not rated or qualified for 24/7
| continuous operation.
|
| From Synology
|
| With support for 550 TB/year workloads1 and rated for a 2.5
| million hours mean time to failure (MTTF), HAS5300 SAS
| drives are built to deliver consistent and class-leading
| performance in the most intense environments. Persistent
| write cache technology further helps ensure data integrity
| for your mission-critical applications.
|
| [1] https://toshiba.semicon-
| storage.com/content/dam/toshiba-ss-v...
|
| [2] https://www.synology.com/en-
| us/company/news/article/HAS5300/...
| Spooky23 wrote:
| There isn't a significant difference between "enterprise"
| and "consumer" in terms of fundamental characteristics.
| They have different firmware and warranties, usually
| disks are tested more methodically.
|
| Max operating range is ~60C for spinning disks and ~70C
| for SSD. Optimal is <40-45C. The larger agents facilties
| afaik tend to run as hot as they can.
| kvemkon wrote:
| > drive has like millions of hours left of it's life.
|
| It doesn't apply for the single drive, only for a large
| number of drives. E.g. if you have 100000 drives (2.4
| million hours MTTF) in a server building with the
| required environmental conditions and maximum workload,
| be prepared to replace a drive once a day in average.
| numpad0 wrote:
| Returns are known bads.
| Aurornis wrote:
| I would also prefer having a large number of high capacity SSDs
| so I could replace my spinning hard drives.
|
| But even the cheapest high capacity SSD deals are still a lot
| more expensive than hard drive array.
|
| I'll continue replacing failing hard drives for a few more
| years. For me that has meant zero replacements over a decade,
| though I planned for a 5% annual failure rate and have a spare
| drive in the case ready to go. I could replace a failed drive
| from the array in the time takes to shut down, swap a cable to
| the spare drive, and boot up again.
|
| SSDs also need to be examined for power loss protection. The
| results with consumer drives are mixed and it's hard to find
| good info about how common drives behave. Getting enterprise
| grade drives with guaranteed PLP from large on-onboard
| capacitors is ideal, but those are expensive. Spinning hard
| drives have the benefit of using their rotational inertia to
| power the drive long enough to finish outstanding writes.
| dleeftink wrote:
| Curious, what's the use case for wanting your data backed-up
| without fail? Is it personal archives or otherwise (business)
| archive related?
|
| Not to say you shouldn't backup your data, but personally I
| wouldn't be to affected if one of my personal drives errored
| out, especially if they contained unused personal files from
| 10+ years ago (legal/tax/financials are another matter).
| EvanAnderson wrote:
| Any data I created, paid to license, or put in significant
| work to gather has to be backed-up with 3-2-1 rule. Stuff I
| can download or otherwise obtain again is best effort but
| not mandatory backup.
|
| Mainly I don't want to lose anything that took work to make
| or get. Personal photos, videos, source code, documents,
| and correspondence are the highest priority.
| cm2187 wrote:
| You can find cheap used enterprise SSDs on ebay. But the
| problem is that even the most power efficient enterprise SSD
| (SATA) idle at like 1w. And given the smaller capacities, you
| need many more to match a hard drive. In the end HDD might
| actually consume less power than an all flash array +
| controllers if you need a large capacity.
| mvanbaak wrote:
| I have a dozen refurbished exos disk in my storage machine.
| Works super! SSD for bigger storage is simply too expensive
| LorenPechtel wrote:
| RAID. Preferably RAID 6. Much, much better to build a system to
| survive failure than to prevent failure.
| dragontamer wrote:
| Don't RAID these days. Software won rather drastically,
| likely because CPUs are finally powerful enough to run all
| those calculations without much of a hassle.
|
| Software solutions like Windows Storage Spaces, ZFS, XFS,
| unRAID, etc. etc are "just better" than traditional RAID.
|
| Yes, focus on 2x parity drive solutions, such as ZFS's
| "raidz2", or other such "equivalent to RAID6" systems. But
| just focus on software solutions that more easily allow you
| to move hard drives around without tying them to motherboard-
| slots or other such hardware issues.
| f_devd wrote:
| FYI XFS is not redundant, also RAID usually refers to
| software RAID these days.
|
| I like btrfs for this purpose since it's extremely easy to
| setup over cli, but any of the other options mentioned will
| work.
| zozbot234 wrote:
| btrfs RAID is quite infamous for eating your data. Has it
| been fixed recently?
| f_devd wrote:
| I believe RAID5/6 is still experimental (although I
| believe the main issues were worked out in early 2024),
| I've seen reports of large arrays being stable since
| then. It's still recommended to run metadata in
| raid1/raid1c3.
|
| RAID0/1/10 has been stable for a while.
| cerved wrote:
| No. RAID 5/6 is still fundamentally broken and probably
| won't get fixed
| lproven wrote:
| > Don't RAID these days. Software won rather drastically
|
| RAID does not mean or imply _hardware_ RAID controllers,
| which you seem to incorrectly assume.
|
| Software RAID is still 100% RAID.
| cm2187 wrote:
| Might be a bit adventurous for primary storage (though with
| enough backup and redundancy, why not). But seems perfect for
| me for backup / cold storage.
| hddherman wrote:
| Hello, author here! It's a nice surprise to notice my own post
| here, but the timing is unfortunate as I'm shuffling things
| around on my home server and will accidentally/intentionally take
| it offline for a bit.
|
| Here's a Wayback Machine copy of the page when that does happen:
| https://web.archive.org/web/20251006052340/https://ounapuu.e...
| leobg wrote:
| I was about to buy a NAS. I find the idea of using an old laptop
| instead interesting. Especially since it comes with UPS built in.
|
| The author is using a ThinkPad T430.
|
| Any experiences?
| tw04 wrote:
| If you don't need any performance it's a great backup strategy.
| If your only way of connecting the drives to the laptop is USB
| I would be concerned about data integrity if it's important
| data.
| amelius wrote:
| Why is USB so bad at data integrity. Doesn't it have error
| detection/correction? If so, that sounds like a huge design
| flaw.
| beagle3 wrote:
| Individual writes are safe, in my Experience with thousands
| of uSB drives in many configurations, some with 12 2tb
| drives hanging on multiple USB hubs at the same time.
|
| However, there are disconnects/reconnects every now and
| then. If you use a standard raid over these usb drives,
| almost every disconnect/reconnect will trigger a rebuild --
| and rebuilds take many hours. If you are unlucky enough to
| have multiple disconnects during a rebuild, you are in
| trouble.
| amelius wrote:
| I've had bitflips with USB transfers of 1-10TB. I don't
| remember the specifics, but my personal confidence in USB
| is low.
| beala wrote:
| The official TrueNAS docs recommend against using USB drives
| [1]. My understanding is that between the USB controller, flaky
| connectors and cables, and usb-to-sata bridges of varying
| quality, there are just too many unknowns to guarantee a
| reliable experience. For example, I've heard that some usb-to-
| sata controllers will drop commands and not report SMART data.
| That said, there are of course many people on the internet who
| have thrown caution to the wind and report that it's working
| fine for them.
|
| Personally I'm in the process of building a NAS with an old 9th
| gen Intel i5. Many mobos support 6 SATA ports and three
| mirrored 20 TB pairs is enough storage for me. I'm guessing
| it'll be a bit more power hungry than a ugreen/synology/etc
| appliance but there will also be plenty of headroom for running
| other services.
|
| [1]
| https://www.truenas.com/docs/core/13.0/gettingstarted/coreha...
| mannyv wrote:
| Been using like 7 external usb drives with 40-50tb total for
| a few years with no issues. Not raid, just backing up drive
| to drive. No controller or drive issues. Mix of seagate and
| wd 8/12/16gb.
|
| I hate blanket recommendations like this by docs. To me, it
| just sounds like some guy had a problem a few times and now
| it's canon. It's like saying "avoid Seagate because their 3tb
| drives sucked." Well they did, but now they seem to be fine.
| zettabomb wrote:
| RAID is much different. You can try it over USB, you won't
| have a good time. TrueNAS is primarily talking about RAID
| users.
| beala wrote:
| Yes I should have specified that this advice is specific
| to RAID configurations in NAS applications.
|
| If you're occasionally copying data to an external USB
| drive, that's totally fine. That's what they were
| designed for.
|
| The issue is that they were not designed for continuous
| use, or much more demanding applications like
| rebuilding/resilvering a drive. It's during these
| applications that issues occur, which is a double whammy,
| because it can cause permanent data loss if your USB
| drive fails during a recovery operation. I did a little
| more research after posting my last comment and came
| across this helpful post on the TrueNAS forums going into
| more depth: https://forums.truenas.com/t/why-you-should-
| avoid-usb-attach...
| jcalvinowens wrote:
| YMMV. I have a 4-drive 20TB mdraid10 across two different
| $50 USB3.0 2-drive enclosures, I've read _petabytes_ off
| this array with years of uptime and absolutely zero
| problems. And it runs on one of those $300 off brand
| NUCs. The 2.5G NIC is the bottleneck on reads.
| Yokolos wrote:
| What may work anecdotally can't necessarily be used for
| official recommendations for a large range of users across
| an unknown range of hardware configurations. If it works
| for you, that's fine. That isn't sufficient to make a
| general statement that everybody will be fine using
| external USB drives, particularly for RAID, especially when
| people will then make you responsible if something goes
| wrong for not making sufficiently safe recommendations. You
| understand that, right?
| cerved wrote:
| Is that with ZFS or something else?
|
| Mainly I wouldn't do it because of there's space and SATA
| ports it seems stupid. Hotter. Worse HW.
|
| Can't really see much good reason to do it tbh except it's
| in a small hot case which is relatively easy to move
| around. Maybe if you do occasionally backups and you don't
| care about scrubbing and redundancy? Otherwise why not
| shuck them and throw them in a case?
| bluedino wrote:
| I've had the same thing from random disconnects etc from
| various USB hard drives and SSD's over the years.
| whazor wrote:
| When I used a laptop as server, the battery became a spicy
| pillow. I think laptops are not designed to be running
| continuously and on warmer temperatures than normal.
| m2has wrote:
| I've use an P51 for about a year now with no issues. I
| initially bought 6bay DAS, but I've since moved to pure SSD
| storage inside the laptop.
| dheera wrote:
| > I was about to buy a NAS.
|
| The UNAS Pro 8 just came out and I'm thinking about getting it,
| switching away from my aging Synology setup ... only thing I
| wish it had was a UPS server as my Synology currently serves
| that purpose to trigger other machines to shut down ...
| ericd wrote:
| I'm considering doing the same, I guess one would basically
| just be splitting functions, a dedicated NAS, and a dedicated
| server for all the functions that Synos tend to perform
| (generally not very well, but at least with pretty low power
| usage).
| Xss3 wrote:
| I think they just released some new prosumer ups.
| VTimofeenko wrote:
| I believe Synology's UPS monitoring is based on nut-
| server[1]. In my setup, I am running the server on a separate
| machine that reads UPS state over USB and Synology is just a
| client. Maybe UNAS could also just work as a client.
|
| [1]: https://networkupstools.org/
| rovr138 wrote:
| You can. It works fine if you know the limitations. An
| important one is, drives could disconnect, so traditional RAID
| wouldn't be good.
|
| If you want redundancy, look at something like SnapRAID,
| http://www.snapraid.it
|
| If you want to combine into a single volume, consider rclone.
| These remotes specifically are the ones I'm thinking could be
| useful,
|
| - https://rclone.org/local/
|
| - https://rclone.org/combine/
|
| - https://rclone.org/cache/
|
| Good luck o7
| phil21 wrote:
| I ran an old Thinkpad as a home router and small home
| server/NAS device for quite a long time, usually swapping out
| my old work upgrades every 3 years or so.
|
| They all had onboard gige so it worked fine - native vlan for
| the inbound Comcast connection, tagged vlans out to a switch
| for the various LAN connections.
|
| They were from the era of DVD drives so I was able to put an
| extra HDD in the DVD slot to expand storage with. One model
| even had a eSATA port.
|
| They worked great. Built-in UPS and they come with a reliable
| crash cart built-in!
| tombert wrote:
| I don't use a laptop, but I use something fairly adjacent: the
| Beelink SER6 (https://www.amazon.com/Beelink-4-75GHz-
| PCIe4-0-Supports-HDMI...), which is basically a gaming laptop
| converted into a small desktop. For the most part, it has
| actually been pretty great. It's quiet, has a CPU that is much
| better than I expected, and a decent enough GPU to do hardware
| transcoding for Jellyfin without much issue.
|
| I use USB chassis of hard drives to work as the "NAS" part, and
| it works fairly well, and this box is also my router (using a
| 10 GbE thunderbolt adapter) though my biggest issue comes with
| large updates in NixOS.
|
| For reasons that are still not completely clear to me, when I
| do a very large system update (rebuilding Triton-llvm for
| Immich seems to really do it), the internal network will
| consistently cut out until I reboot the machine. I _can_ log in
| through the external interface with Tailscale and my phone, so
| the machine itself is fine, but for whatever reason the
| internal network will die.
|
| And that's kind of the price you pay for using a non-server to
| do server work. It will generally work pretty well, but I find
| that it does require a bit more babysitting than a rack mount
| server did.
| IgorPartola wrote:
| For me it was important to have ECC RAM and laptops pretty much
| never have that. My personal recommendation is an old
| IBM/Lenovo workstation tower as the base. I bought one for $35
| on eBay and added $40 of RAM (32GB). A $10 UPS from Goodwill
| with a $25 battery from Amazon, and whatever hard drives you
| want. I run Ubuntu and ZFS on it but next time would probably
| opt for FreeBSD for a nicer OS.
| cerved wrote:
| I own this and it's worth it's weight in gold
| https://www.supermicro.com/en/products/motherboard/A2SDi-H-T...
|
| Yes. It's pricey but it's never been a problem. It can connect
| like 12 HDDs with 256GB ram and has 10GBe and runs at a tiny
| TDP. Has IPMI. Fits in a tiny case.
|
| The only issue I had with this motherboard was that it was
| difficult to find someone who sold it. Love it
|
| Also I don't see the built-in UPS. The external drives still
| use external power
| buckle8017 wrote:
| These drives are very likely refurbs that are unofficial.
|
| White labeling avoids lawsuits.
| aftbit wrote:
| I've been considering "de-enterprising" my home storage stack to
| save power and noise and gain something a bit more modular.
| Currently I'm running on an old NAS 1U machine that I bought on
| eBay for about $300, with a raidz2 of 12x 18TB drives. I have yet
| to find a good way to get nearly that much storage without going
| enterprise or spending an absolute fortune.
|
| I'm always interested in these DIY NAS builds, but they also feel
| just an order of magnitude too small to me. How do you store ~100
| TB of content with room to grow without a wide NAS? Archiving
| rarely used stuff out to individual pairs of disks could work, as
| could running some kind of cluster FS on cheap nodes
| (tinyminimicro, raspberry pi, framework laptop, etc) with 2 or 4x
| disks each off USB controllers. So far none of this seems to
| solve the problem that is solved quite elegantly by the 1U
| enterprise box... if only you don't look at the power bill.
| dragontamer wrote:
| I have to imagine that the best NAS build is simply a 6-core or
| 8-core standard AMD or Intel with a few HBA controllers and
| maybe 10Gbit SPF+ fiber or something.
|
| "Old server hardware" for $300 is a bit of a variation, in that
| you're just buying something from 5 years ago so that its
| cheaper. But if you want to improve power-efficiency, buy a CPU
| from today rather than an old one.
|
| --------
|
| IIRC, the "5 year old used market" for servers is particularly
| good because many datacenters and companies opt for a ~5-year
| upgrade cycle. That means 5-year-old equipment is always being
| sold off at incredible rates.
|
| Any 5-year-old server will obviously have all the features you
| need for a NAS (likely excellent connectivity, expandibility,
| BMS, physical space, etc. etc.). Just you have to put up with
| power-efficiency specs of 5 years ago.
| hypercube33 wrote:
| Dell R500 series is very good for dense storage at low costs
| if you lean to SATA or NL-SAS
| toast0 wrote:
| If you want 100TB, you need a bigger NAS than most, and that
| makes most of the DIY NAS not so good. 2-4 drives seems to be
| where DIY shines. These days motherboards often stop at 4x
| sata, so you'll need a HBA or USB (eww).
|
| Personally, I just don't have that much data, 24TB mirrored for
| important data is probably enough, and I have my old mirror set
| avaialable for media like recorded tv and maybe dvds and blu-
| rays if I can figure out a way to play them that I like better
| than just putting the discs in the machine.
| scottlamb wrote:
| > How do you store ~100 TB of content with room to grow without
| a wide NAS?
|
| In the cloud (S3) or on offline (unpowered HDDs or tapes or
| optical media) I suppose. Most people just don't store that
| much content.
|
| > So far none of this seems to solve the problem that is solved
| quite elegantly by the 1U enterprise box... if only you don't
| look at the power bill.
|
| What kind of power bill are you talking about? I'd expect the
| drives to be about 10W each steady state (more when spinning
| up), so 180W. I'd expect a lower-power motherboard/CPU running
| near idle to be another 40W (or less). If you have a 90%
| efficient PSU, then maybe 250W in total.
|
| If you're way more than that, you can probably swap out the old
| enterprisey motherboard/RAM/CPU/PSU for something more modern
| and do a lot better. Maybe in the same case.
|
| I'm learning 1U is pretty unpleasant though. E.g. I tried an
| ASRock B650M-HDV/M.2 in a Supermicro CSE-813M. A standard IO
| panel is higher than 1U. If I remove the IO panel, the
| motherboard does fit...but the VRM heatsink also was high
| enough that the top case bows a bit when I put it on. I guess
| you can get smaller third party VRM heat sinks, but that's
| another thing to deal with. The CPU cooler options are limited
| (the Dynatron A42 works, but it's _loud_ when the CPU draws a
| lot of power). 40mm case fans are also quite loud to move the
| required airflow. You can buy noctuas or whatever, but they won
| 't really keep it cool. The ones that actually do spin very
| fast and so are very loud. You must have noticed this too,
| although maybe you have a spot for the machine where you don't
| hear the noise all the time.
|
| I'm trying 2U now. I bought and am currently setting up an
| Innovision AS252-A06 chassis: 8 3.5" hot swap bays, 2U, 520mm
| depth. (Of course you can have a lot more drives if you go to
| 2.5" drives, give up hot swap, and/or have room for a deeper
| chassis.) Less worry about if stuff will fit, more room for
| airflow without noise.
| cerved wrote:
| Nah buy the right enterprise gear instead
|
| https://www.supermicro.com/en/products/motherboard/A2SDi-H-T...
| hypercube33 wrote:
| I'd really dig a version of this with a Ryzen AI chip and
| 128gb of ram.
|
| I'm moving to Lenovo tiny m75q series for now due to low idle
| power and heat generated.
| hexagonwin wrote:
| What exactly are these "white label drives"? Aren't these just
| normal seagate exos drives with SMART information wiped and
| labels removed? i.e. just a worse used drive.
| bluedino wrote:
| Weren't shucked drives (removed from enclosures) referred to as
| White label drives at one point?
| ghostly_s wrote:
| Trying to think of reasons why the manufacturer wouldn't want
| their name on them and none of them are good. And for not even
| much of a discount.
| lofaszvanitt wrote:
| I never understood why they let Seagate et al do this game about
| hard drives. If they offer a warranty, then replace the drive to
| brand new, and shove the recertified, fixed whatever bullshit up
| your wahzoo.
| walrus01 wrote:
| I was hoping for a full text dump of the SMART data from the
| drives.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-10-11 23:00 UTC)