Thanks to GowieGod as I stumbled on the 6TB from the 4TB deal.
I was after a 6TB and this is the cheapest I can find right now.
CamelCamelCamel.
Yeah perfect for downloading/storage/archive. Only slow if writing large files over high speed. Read speed normal.
I use SSD for speed sensitive tasks, as even CMR very slow.
🐢
__
.,-;-;-,. /'_\
_/_/_/_|_\_\) /
'-<_><_><_><_>=/\
`/_/====/_/-'\_\
"" "" ""
And? It's a 5400rpm hdd…
Smr is a confusing beast to market….
Because odds are, the type of person who wants to keep 6TB of files is…. That sort of person; the type who manages their own data. Therefore, will feel the sting of SMR pretty severely.
The type who dont store huge data, are left with 2TB ssd's at an increasinly affordable price point.
And even cacheless quad bit ssd drives out perform smr.
Its just an odd thing to even produce.
It makes more sense to have small drives be smr, because those "I dont save things" type of people, will likely never exhaust the cache and can still store say, 3TB should they wish.
Consumers man. iT used to be about advancement and excitement. Now its money grabbey. i miss old IT.
I disagree. I am one of those people, manage my own data and backups. Sure I am a little paranoid about having multiple copies of important files due to being burnt in the past, but SMR (especially 6TB) is perfect for this use case. Either online or offline storage of 6TB of data which is write once and store, or write once and read many. SSD's are still too expensive for this purpose, for me anyway (ie $700 vs $180). I would rather save the money even if I have to run the PC once overnight to make up the speed difference. It will get closer though, since desktop hard drives were similar prices in 2018 as now, yet SSD's been coming down fast.
PS - IT has always been both advancement/excitement and money grabbing, and still is. That will never change.
"Because odds are, the type of person who wants to keep 6TB of files is…. That sort of person; the type who manages their own data. Therefore, will feel the sting of SMR pretty severely."
Just for backups SMR would be ok. SMR is also better for some applications in data centres due to higher data density.
Just for backups SMR would be ok.
Thats a risky statement though; for small incrimental backups, you're totally correct.
But trying to throw my 6TB array onto one of these as an off site backup, it crawls VERY early into the transfer (as soon as the cache fills).
Spend $10 more and you can get the Seagate Barracuda 6TB
https://www.amazon.com.au/Seagate-Barracuda-3-5-Inch-Interna…
Good price. But its SMR too, and I normally rank WD over Seagate. Can get it locally for same price https://www.shoppingexpress.com.au/buy/seagate-barracuda-6tb…
I love these drives for my Plex library. Is there a better large capacity disk for reading 90% compressed 1080p and 10% 4K?
I've never had an issue with large 4K either transcode or not.
I'm in the process of buying more disk so if someone can recommend another?
Cheers
These are a bit slooooowww…