External Drive for NAS Backups

Bredo on 23/03/2025 - 13:48

I'm after recommendations for a reliable external drive for backing up a Synology NAS (once or twice a month) and to take it off-site.

4TB it's enough for my needs, would consider bigger if cheap enough otherwise 4tb or 5tb it's more than fine.

I think HDD it's best than SSD for this purpose but happy to be corrected?.

Can anyone recommend me which drives have good reputation for this?

Even if right now aren't any good prices for them, but at least I'll know what to look for and can keep an eye on any future deals.

Cheers!

Computing Computer Peripheral External Hard Drive NAS

Comments

  • gimlic on 23/03/2025 - 14:16

    Either WD or Seagate externals whichever cheapest. If you're going to turn it on and off to bring offsite then SSD would be better. HDD prefers to be running all the time.

    Are you looking to build a 3-2-1 backup model?

    • Bredo on 23/03/2025 - 14:25
      +1

      I thought SSD it's better when plugged in all the time? I think it's because of the lack of current can cause data fading (or something like that)?

      Yeah I'm planning on getting the 3-2-1 setup in place, and this is the last piece missing. Currently everything backups to a NAS with RAID6, the NAS backups daily to a Seagate HDD which is always plugged in

      I thought about cloud options but they just too expensive for 3tb and even 2tb (my current backup size it's 1.9TB)

      • wongm on 23/03/2025 - 14:37

        Have you considered Backblaze as the cloud backup option?

        • Bredo on 23/03/2025 - 14:43

          I did check it out, but the price for 2tb b2b backblaze it's ~$230/yr

          • geekcohen on 23/03/2025 - 17:30

            @Bredo: Have a look at Wasabi S3. $7 USD per month, per TB. I use it for my CCTV backups and my previous jobs NAS backup.

            • ldd-mn on 23/03/2025 - 17:58
              +1

              @geekcohen: Backblaze B2 is $6 USD/TB/month. Wasabi S3 would cost more per year.

              • geekcohen on 24/03/2025 - 07:45

                @ldd-mn: Yeah fair enough.

                $230 a year for off-site storage isn't too bad overall though. Easier than having to go back and forth with the storage device.

        • Breddo on 24/03/2025 - 08:08
          +2

          I’ve just switched my cloud backup to backblaze and pretty happy with it so far. Only drag is my nbn upload speed. Initial backup of 1.5tb took 3 weeks

      • peteru on 23/03/2025 - 14:50
        +4

        Agreed, I would not use SSD for off-site backups. Waste of money and risky.

      • zoltanc on 23/03/2025 - 18:09

        Spinning hard drives have extra wear and tear when powered on and off often.

        SSDs can lose charge over time, but they also suffer from “read disturb”, so keeping them plugged in and reading data from them can degrade the data over time. The drive itself is fine though, if you rewrite the data.

        If you are backing up and writing to the drive regularly, I don’t think there will be much difference. However, spinning hard drives tend to fail gradually, as sectors go bad. An SSD is more likely to fail spectacularly, where the drive stops working entirely.

        • Grunntt on 24/03/2025 - 11:01
          +1

          Spinning hard drives have extra wear and tear when powered on and off often….
          …If you are backing up and writing to the drive regularly

          The OP states it will only be once or twice a month so I wouldn't call that 'often'.
          That's less than the drives in a PC that's turned on/off each day and they seem to last pretty well.

          I'd be using a spinning disk and replacing it maybe yearly with a new one if the data on it is important.

          • Bredo on 24/03/2025 - 11:49

            @Grunntt: Yeah I agree, that's exactly why I think HDD it's the best drive type for my case

  • peteru on 23/03/2025 - 14:48

    In my experience the Seagate externals tend to be dodgier than WD. However, I think this changes with every model revision. The Seagate external enclosures tend to have capacity and drive limitations, so if you ever end up shucking the enclosure and wanting to reuse it with a different drive, you might not get very far.

    For backups, I would recommend getting a dock and using naked drives that you put into shock proof enclosures for transport. Cheaper and more flexible.

    • Bredo on 23/03/2025 - 15:01

      A shock proof enclosure for HDD sounds like a good alternative, I'll have a look at what options are available. If you know any decent one please let me know, cheers

      • peteru on 24/03/2025 - 14:42

        A card board box lined with foam. No need to over-think it. Retail packaged HDDs come with reasonable level of protection, so just reuse that. If you are paranoid, you can put that box in a second, outer box and put bubble wrap between boxes.

  • localhost on 23/03/2025 - 18:42
    +2

    Check those small drives - https://www.jbhifi.com.au/collections/seagate-5tb-backup-plu…

    I remember found a deal a while ago for ~$150 for 5TB.

  • trankillity on 24/03/2025 - 08:55
    +1

    I know it's not the question specifically, but highly recommend frequent cloud backups too. I selectively back my important stuff up off my NAS to Google Drive daily.

  • Ryanek on 24/03/2025 - 09:39
    +1

    Only 4TB? you should just backup to the cloud.

    • Bredo on 24/03/2025 - 11:50

      As stated, it's out of my budget

  • Universal Constant on 24/03/2025 - 12:15

    Checkout idrive, they now have lots of options. First year only for 5tb is like ftom $10 or something. Also have encryption with your own key (don't lose it) and their backup client uses something like rsync.

  • md333 on 24/03/2025 - 12:19

    I've just been using bare hdds with a dock for 15 years, started with 1TB now up to 8TB.
    I just use the packaging the HDD was posted in, plastic box type thing, in an antistatic bubblewrap bag. Gets transported weekly by bicycle.

    Only mishap is I once dropped one on the floor and damaged it, I think actually before it ever got used. Not really a disaster as it was obvious and could be replaced immediately.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join