hard drive how long works ?

[HOGRNAHRO]

I have two question that
1 -all hard drive how long works
2 - which one better hard draive SSD & HDD

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

The answers to both questions depend on many things.

1. HDDs can last from being dead as soon as you get it to several years. I had an old Maxtor that lasted seven years and I took it out of service only because its technology was horribly out of date. I also had a Seagate that was dead when I received it. All HDDS will fail sooner or later, given enough time. While one can understandably want to get a HDD that will last as long as possible, it's just not possible to depend on it to do so. That is why it is extremely important to keep duplicates (also called backups) of your data so that, if the HDD your data should die, you will be able to replace your data from the backup. It is also wise to keep more than one backup since the HDDs (or other media) they are kept on can fail.

As for specific brands, I generally look for the ones with the longest warranties. I've had far better luck with Western Digital HDDs than I've had with Seagate HDDs. Others have had better luck with Seagate than they have with Western Digital. All manufacturers have occasional bad runs so the best thing to do is look at recent customer reviews of any brand you are considering to make sure most people aren't having problems.

2. Whether SSDs are better or worse than HDDs depends on what one will use them for. For sheer speed and physical shock resistance, SSDs are best. But, they are also the most expensive. HDDs are best for storing large amounts of data because they are available in larger sizes than SSDs. They also cost much less than SSDs. Generally speaking, SSDs are best for installing an OS and programs on because they will boot an OS and open programs much faster than HDDs. HDDs are generally best for storing data because they can hold more and are much less expensive. Unless one frequently moves huge blocks of data on and off a drive, the faster HDDs (ones that spin at 7200 rpm) are fast enough for handling data.

 

[HOGRNAHRO]

thank you so mach my frend

 

[indianacarnie]

I've had hard drives last for 7+ years and I've had them last maybe 7 minutes. Depends.

An SSD is far better in my opinion.

 

[whs]

I would also vote for an SSD if budget allows. But HDDs can last a long time. I have appr. 20 HDDs and some are from 2007. Only 1 ever failed. From my 7 SSDs one also failed after 2 years but was replaced by the Mushkin company.

It is like with cars, if you get a Monday morning model, you may be out of luck. But once it runs for a few months, chances are that it will not break soon.

 

[mjf]

I have numerous Seagate 1TB Barracuda HDDs (quite low cost) that have been running for years without signs of faults (Reallocated sectors). Power on hours may be more relevant.
SSDs are far faster!! and good for your operating system and installed programs.
BUT treat a HDD or an SSD as something that could fail tomorrow and always have system images and other form of critical data backup. Fortunately you can get warning signs that a drive is in trouble.

 

[LMiller7]

I have a 6 GB drive purchased in 1998, now more than 15 years old. It hasn't seen much use in recent years but it still works and SMART reports no warnings. But I think that is unlikely with modern drives, at least consumer grade devices. I expect that the pressure on manufacturers to produce drives with ever higher capacity and performance and still keep prices low has taken it's toll in reliability. Enterprise class drives designed for server use are much better but you will pay a premium price for them.

SSD drives have great potential but for long term reliability they are still something of an unknown quantity. It isn't fair to judge new drives according to experience with older drives manufactured with different technology. Newer drives of course haven't been around long enough to tell.

Many modern drives will be replaced, not as a result of failure but because they no longer meet current standards of capacity and performance. Others will be dead on arrival. But do understand that many such drives have failed due to damage in shipping. Busy shipping people don't always take due care and a container may fall and cause serious damage. But unless damage is obviously apparent it will typically be sent on it's way.

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

...Fortunately you can get warning signs that a drive is in trouble.

Not always. HDDs can fail without warning; SSDs usually (if not always) do.

 

[mjf]

OK.
I'll stand by:
Fortunately you often can get warning signs that a HDD drive is in trouble.
Noises and SMART data will alert you. An unusual increase in reallocated sector counts for HDDs is a warning. You're not flying totally blind.
Admittedly, I'm not up on predicting failure of SSDs.
I image catastrophic/sudden controller board failure would be hard to predict.

At the end of the day if you have an OS partition system image and backup your other data you're covered.

 

[whs]

Unfortunately. I had one Seagate HDD and one SSD go belly up from one minute to the other.

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

...At the end of the day if you have an OS partition system image and backup your other data you're covered.

Absolutely. And the more backups you have (up to a point), the better since the media (HDD, SSD, flash drive, tape, optical disk, cloud, clay tablets) the backup is on also can fail.

 

[LMiller7]

Regarding SSD failures.
I did electronics service for some 30 years and my experience was that failure of electronic components was almost always without warning, at least none that was noticed. And when there was a warning it was usually very short. Warning of failure of mechanical devices was more common, but you could never count on that either. What I have read of SSD failures is that there is rarely any warning of failure. I wouldn't expect any.

Whether it be an SSD or conventional drive, make your backups while the drive is working well. Wait for some danger signs and it may be too late. And professional recovery of SSD data is very expensive, considerably higher than for conventional drives. This is due more to the different nature of the device than a lack of experience with the new technology.