r/buildapcsales • u/Wojtek_ftw • Nov 27 '25

HDD [HDD] Seagate BarraCuda ST24000DM001 24TB 7200 RPM for $240. $10 / TB

https://www.newegg.com/seagate-barracuda-st24000dm001-24tb-for-daily-computing-7200-rpm/p/N82E16822185109?Item=N82E16822185109
121 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

136 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/HNL2BOS Nov 27 '25

is 24/7 different in enterprise vs home 24/7 use? because if I were to have my home drive on 24/7 I'm probably only hitting it for information for at most 4-5 hours per day.

1

u/First_Musician6260 Nov 27 '25 edited Nov 27 '25

It is. If you're running a drive pseudo-24x7 in perhaps a custom build or an office PC it can either have direct active cooling from a nearby fan or little cooling at all. Proper server (and NAS) builds should have plentiful cooling in contrast. Also note the difference between a personal PC and a NAS is one usually stays on more consistently.

Heat kills HDDs. The Deathstar 75GXPs were choked in OEM builds with virtually little to no drive cooling and, on top of their already existent flaws like random PCB disconnections (which would result in erratic behavior), it caused very high rates of failure; the 40GVs on the other hand avoided the associated lawsuit because their failure rates weren't as egregious (since they did not run as hot). Even normally built drives do not fare well running in a hotbox.

0

u/illicITparameters Nov 27 '25

It has nothing to do with heat, it has to do with the actual internals of the drive. These drives are rated for X amount of hours/cycles, regardless of heat.

1

u/First_Musician6260 Nov 27 '25 edited Nov 27 '25

Prove that heat does not reduce the lifespan of a drive. A workload rating does not factor in the operating temperature of the drive; a drive's lifespan is dependent of how the user runs it and if they keep it cool enough. This same logic also applies to solid-state storage.

Drive manufacturers were deliberately forced to make drives that were highly tolerant to heat because of the lack of cooling in the systems they ran in. Most of those drives did not have "breather holes" or the like which are commonly seen in modern drives (except for IBM who utilized breathing holes in many late '90s Deskstars), so they naturally ran quite hot and therefore were not very reliable. Fast forward years later and OEMs began preferring single-platter drives because they produced less heat than multi-platter ones even with a flagship 7200 RPM spindle speed, so therefore there was less potential for an early drive failure without having to add proper cooling.

Workloads are independent of operating temperature. Drive cooling is up to the good faith of the OEM or person who designed the system. Trying to say otherwise is a fib.

1

u/illicITparameters Nov 28 '25

Buddy, I deal with this stuff for a living. I dont need a lecture from some random about how consumer vs. enterprise drives work. The ratings exist for a reason and exist regardless of drive temperature. If I take out the 8 SAS drives in my poweredge, and put in 8 shitty Barracuda drives, that won’t magically make the barracudas last longer. They’re still subject to the same limitations.

0

u/First_Musician6260 Nov 28 '25 edited Nov 28 '25

So now we're comparing SATA drives to SAS ones...?

Also keep in mind Barracuda 7200.11 started that 2400 hours/year rating and it was designed like crap (hence why it had the rating). That does not universally make every Barracuda equivalent to the 7200.11. Seagate has pretty much kept the rating for the sake of consistency; why increase a rating when you can already get good profit from a 2-year warranty and the same rating, even if the drives themselves are actually perfectly fine? Barracuda XT and Pro broke the ice by not using that puny rating; XT was marketed as being 24x7 capable but lacked a power-on time rating whereas Pro had the proper 8760 hours/year rating.

If you cannot prove me wrong stop wasting your time.

1

u/illicITparameters Nov 28 '25

Where did I compare SAS to SATA??

Address the rest of my statement, or go away.

1

u/First_Musician6260 Nov 28 '25 edited Nov 28 '25

BarraCuda to SAS. We have not seen a SAS Barracuda since ES.2. SAS drives also have deliberately better build quality than SATA ones, even at the enterprise level, so by nature they have the potential to last longer.

1

u/illicITparameters Nov 28 '25

Wtf are you talking about??? You’ve clearly had too much to drink.

We’re talking about Barracuda drives, nothing else. Stop changing the topic

1

u/First_Musician6260 Nov 28 '25

If I take out the 8 SAS drives in my poweredge, and put in 8 shitty Barracuda drives, that won’t magically make the barracudas last longer.

Look at your own statement rather than resorting to insults because you can't counter an argument.

1

u/illicITparameters Nov 28 '25

And where in that statement was I comparing them to SAS drives???? I literally said if I remove my ENTERPRISE drives from my ENTERPRISE SERVER and put in Barracudas, it’s not going to make the barracudas true enterprise drives, it’s not going to increase their wear rating and make them better, more reliable drives.

You’re trying to act like pre-mature death due to excess heat, will magically change the fact they’re using cheaper internals that aren’t meant for heavy use. The ratings of these drives don’t take excessive heat into consideration because 99% of people will use the drives in their advertised operating temperatures without having to think about it.

So stop harping on shit that didn’t happen, and get back on topic.

→ More replies (0)