Am I the only one getting 1-2 TB drives in 3.5" SATA?

frostman on 25/03/2019 - 13:20

I have a 2TB SATA HDD on my PC, this drive is purely for downloading and extracting large media content, Game ISOs, etc.
it also holds some family photos and and video, but due to the fact that large amounts of data is traversed, I thought it's more stable having a mechanical drive instead of an SSD..Recently it started clicking so it's a signal to replace asap before it fails, so far it's still good.

I jumped on a Seagate Barra 2TB for like $105 with 7200 RPM, however recently saw SSD 1-2TB drives going for $30 more than what I paid.

So question is, if the SSD and SATA drives in < 3TB are almost on par with eachother with cost, what would be 1 benefit to continue to buy SATA 3.5" mechanicals?

Computing

Comments

  • dcep on 25/03/2019 - 13:32
    +4

    Pricing wise, You still get double / triple capacity from HDD vs SSD

    SSD 1TB maybe as low as $150 but definitely not 2TB.

    You can get 3TB or 4TB HDD for that price

    https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Seagate-BarraCuda-1TB-2TB-3TB-4T…

    • FireRunner on 25/03/2019 - 13:46

      This. Only recently has reputable brand SSDs come below $150 for 1TB.
      Some ozbargainers reckon we'll see $200 for 2TB around June/July but doesn't sound like OP can wait until then.
      Even then, SSD prices will still be about 2x more expensive than their HDD counterpart. Currently its more like 3-4x more expensive for >2TB drives.

      • Skyllian Blitz on 25/03/2019 - 18:18

        Where I work, the most sold HDD is the Seagate Barracuda 2TBs. 1TB and 2TB SSDs have picked up since same time last year but only the 250GB SSDs sell even remotely close in volume to the 2TBs.

    • frostman on 25/03/2019 - 13:59

      Thanks, if the prices were almost on-par, would the mechanical still have any benefit over SSD?

      • FireRunner on 25/03/2019 - 14:10
        +2

        SSDs are faster and more reliable than HDDs. The only advantage HDDs have is price.

        • DarkOz on 25/03/2019 - 14:42
          +1

          And I thought HDD are still more reliable than SSD. Since when SSD are more reliable? This is a legit question. I am not trying to be sarcastic.

          I have the fastest 500gb SSD forbos and gsmes with 1T and 2T black caviars for storage of family photos and videos.

          • FireRunner on 25/03/2019 - 15:12
            +1

            @DarkOz: I was under the impression that HDDs are less reliable because they involve a mechanical spinning disk vs flash memory.

      • dcep on 25/03/2019 - 15:03
        +4

        24/7 extensive writes (local data server / surveillance) still favors HDD.

        Also, SSD can die without symptoms regardless of % of health.
        HDD will most likely shows symptoms or report SMART errors before completely dead.
        But running Raid-1 solves this, so not really a problem for SSD.

  • spackbace on 25/03/2019 - 14:07

    it also holds some family photos and and video

    Have a cloud backup? Google photos etc

  • Nutrino on 25/03/2019 - 19:13

    "SSD 1-2TB drives going for $30 more than what I paid."

    Where did you see a 2tb for $30 more?.

  • HardlyCharly on 25/03/2019 - 20:29

    "what would be 1 benefit to continue to buy SATA 3.5" mechanicals?"

    Fewer, larger HDD's. I have 3x 4TB and 5x2TB, I can turn those 8 HDD's into just 2 HDD's if I upgrade to 10TB drives. If it's being used for downloading etc, why aren't your space needs increasing?

    • frostman on 25/03/2019 - 20:42

      why aren't your space needs increasing?

      There's no need.

      I had a 2TB drive when 2TB were first released, pretty much equivalent of getting a 10TB now.
      I stored every one of my top movies from Van Damme, etc

      I looked back one day at my collection of like 1,000 movies and realised i'll never get the time to re-watch them.
      Even if I do, it's pointless to watch a movie you've already seen.

      Music? I have ~50gb worth

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join