Marketplace
PODCAST
Thanks to TA for the Original PODCAST 20% off Selected Sellers on eBay Deal Post
Seagate Backup Plus Portable (Black) 5TB $192 Delivered @ Futu Online eBay
1060
nocure on 19/10/2018 - 12:00 ebay.com.au (1872 clicks)
Last edited 19/10/2018 - 12:03 by 1 other user
Last edited 19/10/2018 - 12:03 by 1 other user
Related Stores
closed Comments
Newegg has 8TB Seagates for $232 including GST and delivery. That will likely get you over the line.
They were slightly better a few weeks ago when i posted a deal but i'm still watching prices. I'm still hoping black friday deals are better.
Portable HDD vs Desktop HDD. 😏
no.
internal drives are more expensive than external. otherwise i wouldnt be shucking drives.
@Antikythera: 2.5" are more expensive than either 3.5" external or internal per TB usually. These are much better to make backups with and take offsite. If you WANT an internal drive for a desktop then sure, go for the 8TB 3.5". If you want one to use with your laptop this 5TB 2.5"
is a much better deal.@[Deactivated]: Beware, a 5TB 2.5inch may be thicker than a standard 2.5inch
From my previous research anything over 2TB uses an extra platter and will not fit in a laptop.
Of course your needs may vary
@greatlamp: Yeah, the drive inside the caddy is 15mm's thick.
It won't fit into a laptop or a PS4, they require 7mm thickness. The most common thickness is the 9.5mm fyi, and right now, the highest capacity drive you can get in a 7mm thickness is 2TB… so we haven't quite advanced since 2014 on the HDD front.
link?
https://www.newegg.com/global/au/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N…
they also had a 8tb WD MyBook at the same price yesterday which i meant to mention in this thread. but it must have been an error as its now back up to $278
Are these just normal SATA drives inside, or are they that fixed USB interface scam?
Normal 2.5" SATA drives.
This price is not bad even for normal SATA.
Normal, but significantly thicker than a 1TB or 2TB drive.
Normal, but they are too thick to fit in a laptop.
Noob question, is this a good deal?
Seems to be. $249 at Officeworks and $299 at JB Hi-Fi
They're regularly had for $229 inc shipping through other eBay sellers. So this isn't 20% off, but better than 15% off for real. Have seen $119 before. Did pay $119 USD for one a while back from Amazon US, but with the current exchange rate + GST now being a thing + shipping this is probably a better deal today.
Having just replaced 2 3TB Seagate drives in my NAS which also has 2 WD drives in them, I'll never buy another Seagate drive again.
Standard power outage at home caused both Seagates to go "Click of Death" - no impact on WDs. Replaced with 4TB WDs!
Can you please explain NAS and WD?
Network attached storage, Western Digital.
The former is an external storage array, usually containing multiple physical drives. The latter is a manufacturer.
I have an N40L (see: http://n40l.wikia.com/wiki/HP_MicroServer_N40L_Wiki) running 4 x 3.5" hard drives running Ubuntu to serve as a home storage (NAS) hub. 2 of the drives were Western Digital (WD)
NAS - Network Access Storage. A contraption that helps you club HDDs together to create your own little cloud at home.
WD - Western Digital - Drives I've had the opposite experience with - I find Seagate more reliable after losing a lot of imp stuff to a WD portable drive that malfunctioned. I popped the case open hoping to get the drive into a different case to try and retrieve it, and surprise, these effin drives have their own ingenious design that won't let you do that.My personal recorded is pretty much 50/50 WD vs. Seagate failures. They'll all wear out and fail eventually anyway, so keep multiple backups, budget for regular replacements, and forget about the silly brand wars.
@dm01: as someone who performs data recovery - i agree with this. Although i usually have more success recovering from a seagate than a wd.
I presume you're talking about 3.5" drives, so not really comparable to these 2.5" drives anyway. And are you using server grade drives, or consumer ones?
"Standard power outage" is a bit of a contradiction - a power outage is an anomaly.
Where's your UPS?
Standard power outage - not brought on by a tree falling on a power line or lightning.
UPS is still in the shop.
I wasn't comparing to these drives explicitly - Seagate drives have a long history of click of death in all form factors. Google will give you details
Nothing standard about a sudden loss of power. I assume they're consumer drives then since you haven't indicated otherwise, so quite possibly being used in a way they weren't designed for.
I wasn't comparing to these drives explicitly - Seagate drives have a long history of click of death in all form factors
If you weren't meaning to compare directly, then why bother mentioning you NAS-wrapped 3.5" drives killed by a power outage in a deal for 2.5" portable drives? Just an excuse to have a whinge about a brand?
@dm01: Or let prospective buyers know about the quality issues inherent in the Seagate brand - been in IT for 25 years, sort of know a little about this stuff, whereas others may not be aware and assume all hard drives are the same and when they are storing someones precious photos, documents etc, its sort of important
Or let prospective buyers know about the quality issues inherent in the Seagate brand
Yeah except that there are no inherent quality issues, you're just peddling brand-bias.
…sort of know a little
From what you've said so far you certainly seem to sort of know a little.
For anyone interested in actually learning about hard drive failure rates, a good place to start is Backblaze' quarterly articles. They use enough drives to actually have a clue.
@dm01: Incorrect as per just about all you've written - I'm not peddling brand bias. I'm relaying my experience having had 2 seagate drives fail this time. THATS CALLED A FACT
I could talk about the 2TB Seagates that I've also had fail, the 1TB ones I've had fail - these too are called FACTS
@CachePC: Nah, that's just your experience with two drives. I've personally had as many WD drives fail as I have Seagate ones, and all up I've used more Seagate, so WD have a higher failure rate for. But because I actually understand the statistical insignificance of my (and your) experiences, you won't hear making silly blanket statements about brands.
Calm down and get some perspective.
@dm01: https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-stats-for-2017/
Who would by a 4TB Seagate ?
3.17% failure for one rev, 15.19% for another rev, and 29.08% for another rev - stellar results. Thanks for the reference, I didn't realise you were backing me up@CachePC: For any other statistically challenged persons out there, it also pays to read the words:
Quarterly failure rates can be volatile, especially for models that have a small number of drives and/or a small number of drive days. For example, the Seagate 4 TB drive, model ST4000DM005, has a annualized failure rate of 29.08%, but that is based on only 1,255 drive days and 1 (one) drive failure.
@dm01: Yep, but the 78,503 drive days with a annualised failure rate of 15.34% for one of the other revisions (33 drive failures) and 35,168,535 for a 2.96% annualised failure rate (2850 drives that failed!!!) are probably material as well don't you think ? Otherwise you are focusing on a sample set thats too small (when you do a Bachelor of Applied Science in Computer Science, you do 2 years of mathematics at Uni - just saying)
…Otherwise you are focusing on a sample set thats too small…
Like, for example:
Having just replaced 2 3TB Seagate drives in my NAS which also has 2 WD drives in them, I'll never buy another Seagate drive again.
"…when you do a Bachelor of Applied Science in Computer Science, you do 2 years of mathematics at Uni - just saying"
Cool bro, your degree sounds like money well spent.
@CachePC: Yeah mate, great point. I've been in IT myself for > 30 years and have used/ repaired countless PC's & HDD's. 80% of my HD failures whether due to click of death/old age were mostly Seagate. Impressively I still have three 15+ years old WD going strong (media server).
@CachePC: @CachePC
Or let prospective buyers know about the quality issues inherent in the Seagate brand - been in IT for 25 years, sort of know a little about this stuff,
Depends on the model really, every HDD manufacturer has good runs and bad runs. At my work my boss is very old guy due to retire soon but the only HDD brands he trusts are Seagate & Toshiba and we sell a ton of desktop PCs to customers exclusively with Seagate HDDs and to have a HDD fail is pretty rare. It is usually the motherboard that goes first when the machine is like 8yrs old (The store has been running for 25yrs with many loyal customers)
At home on my personal setup I have had a couple of HDD failures and I run both WD & Seagate drives in my systems, I just get whatever is good for $/GB and runs at 7200RPM as I don't feel strongly about one brand or another. My failures are from both brands but I mean it doesn't really matter in the scheme of things as they are mechanical devices and there is a ton of things that could go wrong with them causing a failure. Just make sure you have a backup plan in place as I just replace the HDD then restore the backup from my NAS (or if a NAS drive fails let it do it's 72hr rebuild lol) life goes on.
I would agree Seagate seem to be more likely to click click. WD more often suffer corruption and bad sectors becoming unusable. I've known WD blue 320gb, Hitachi 1TB, WD 1tb and Seagate 3TB all be be terrible but they were specific series. If you want cheap and new series you roll the dice if you are going to have a 10-20% higher failure rate the rare time it happens. But the 100ish failures I've dealt with isn't entirely scientific.
I'll never buy another Seagate drive again.
Welcome to the club. There's many of us. Trash products.
The Seagate click of death is an easy fix (not). But yes I've done it successfully:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqC4VNHkjvc
I've had the same issue with WD drives. Last week, I decided "(profanity) all hdds" and bought a whole lot of DDR4.
Now I store all my data in RAM. It's fast, quiet and no more "Click of Death".what is the failure rate on DDR4? Or is it a depends on usage thing?
what is the failure rate on DDR4? Or is it a depends on usage thing?
We don't care about documented failure rates here. My failure rate is 0% so all good! (profanity) HDDs and SSDs because I had a couple of each of them fail!
@idonotknowwhy: What I am asking is if you just flash some data to the RAM and don't touch it, will it last a very long time?
@serpserpserp: Oh you're asking legitimately?
Yeah, if you allocate a tmpfs, you can store files on it, and they'll persist until you reboot / power fails.
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Tmpfs
the seagate 3TB drives have some of the highest failure rates out of all 3.5" sata drives but to switch to WDs based on this one experience seems strange. I perform data recovery and rate both WD and Seagate fairly evenly.
4TB models from either brand have much lower failure rates
some more info: https://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/tech/2016/02/…
The published data showed that BackBlaze experienced a 32 percent failure rate with this one specific hard drive, while other drives they were using ranged from 4 percent to 8 percent failure rates (including a different 3TB drive from Seagate).
That 3TB HDD failure debacle happened years ago. Years and years ago. Did they never do anything to fix it? That seems unlikely.
Seagate fan boys out in force it seems.
The issues Seagate has had in the past, ex:
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/222267-seagate-faces-law…Reveal a lack of quality control in their manufacturing plant. The technology is old, and is not worth investing in.
I have no reason to believe that their latest model, whatever size it is, will be built any differently.
Nevertheless I buy Seagate externals and run them in raid, when the price saving is significant
Seagate fan boys out in force it seems.
Followed closely by the bias-brigade it would appear…
The issues Seagate has had in the past, ex:
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/222267-seagate-faces-law…A lawsuit based on 2015 data published by Backblaze regarding 3TB drives deployed in 2012…
I have no reason to believe that their latest model, whatever size it is, will be built any differently
No? The years of data Backblaze have published since 2015 are not to be believed or relied upon? Just the 2015 reports of failed 2012 drives.
Seagate's quality control is so bad that Backblaze (whose data you're relying on here to make your argument) currently run more than 75% Seagate drives…but don't let that stop you cherrypicking from their 2015 data.
Just don't go looking for cherries in their 2018 3Q results, since it was a WD model that had the highest failure rate in that period.
These would be SMB drives too, so don't expect zippy performance, especially once they start to fill up.
I think you mean SMR - Shingled Magnetic Recording drives. SMB is a Windows File Sharing protocol :)
Yes, yes I did - thank you Zorlin and 🖕🏻 you autocorrect.
Can be used for xbox one?
Yes
Why couldn't it?
It says “backup” so im worried it has shitty read performance if im going to play games off it for xbox
It is a SMR drive so it will have shitty write performance but it will definitely still work for XBOX as the read performance is still good.
Just bought a 2TB one for $88. Now I'm not so happy.
If you bought the $88 drive with 20% off = 88 * 0.8 / 2 = $35.2 per TB
This deal would be $38.4 per TBUnfortunately, I didn't find any avaliable code when I place my order. Anyway,the product is good.
$186.15 at Amazon plus eligible for 6% cashback via cash rewards or shopback https://www.amazon.com.au/Seagate-Backup-Portable-External-S…
Post it as a seperate deal - that's a good price.
I concur with dm01
Only if you are an Amazon Prime member (otherwise the postage added won't be worth it) and looks like it is international (ship from USA perhaps). So expect 7 days+ for it to arrive.
+GST
@O O: The advertised price includes GST as per Australian law. Cash back is on the GST exclusive price though. So if you're a prime member and can claim the 6% cash back (~$10) it'll end up costing about $176, STVFMN.
I thought they only did cashback on certain categories. e.g. Clothing?
Are you sure cashback is applicable on this product?
From my personal experience, seagate is easy to break.
I've had more WD drives break, but they're both good brands with decent warranties, so I buy whichever is the best value at the time.
I've had one for nearly a year, and surprisingly it still works.
I bought it because it was the the largest 2.5" HDD available in a small enclosure.
One positive about this drive: It comes with Paragon NTFS for Mac.
One negative: Treat it like an Archive Drive (write a few times, read many times).
I've had one for nearly a year, and surprisingly it still works.
Why is that surprising? HDDs can last for many years, especially if you're not running them 24/7
What's its sequential write speed like?
newegg seems to have a 6TB one for $185.90 that includes free shipping
https://www.newegg.com/global/au/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N…
That's a 3.5" desktop drive.
I’m after a bigger Time Machine drive for my Mac. If cost is no issue, would this size be better value or a 4Tb?
Seems strange that you would say "if cost is no issue" then ask about "value". Not sure what you are valuing other than cost?
Let me rephrase - would it be better value going for the 4Tb or paying the extra for the 5Tb. Haven checked out the prices of portables in a couple of years since I bought my 2Tb, so not really sure what the average cost of a Terabyte is these days and if the price difference between the 4 and 5 is worth it.
Think this is very slightly cheaper than the 4tb gets to per TB. IMO a couple of bucks different is always worth getting the larger size anyway unless you're not sure you'll ever need that total volume. Having less things to physically keep track of is worth something anyway. If you're only using it for time machine for one Mac though, you might not see the value in the extra space.
Can someone help me, I've got a couple hdd that are full, and I store heaps of "stuff" that builds up regularly and also need to access this stuff regularly via TV, ps4 etc. Would I be better off getting a NAS or another Hdd. I've considered the NAS but I'm a noob and not entirely sure how they operate. Will the TV, computer, ps4 all be able to access the NAS.
very tempted!!