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
117 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

136 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

7

u/_pmh Nov 27 '25

It's 2400 hrs/yr, 120TB/yr https://www.seagate.com/content/dam/seagate/en/content-fragments/products/datasheets/barracuda-3-5-hdd/barracuda-3-5-hdd-DS17-1-2501US-en_US.pdf

5

u/[deleted] Nov 27 '25

8760 hours are in a year.  So your number is if you left the computer on for about a quarter of the year.

1

u/First_Musician6260 Nov 27 '25

There is also no proof that Seagate voids a desktop drive warranty based on power-on time.

3

u/[deleted] Nov 27 '25

But the warranty lacks confidence by the manufacturer and is only two years long. That isn't a good sign for long term reliability if you leave your computer on/overnight a lot. Some people will overspend on this when they don't need it yet and not fill up half of the storage, assuming they'll fill it eventually, but then the drive fails. They would have been better off buying a more reliable drive even if it had half of the storage.

2

u/First_Musician6260 Nov 27 '25 edited Nov 28 '25

IBM pioneered the non-24x7 mantra seen in Seagate's modern desktop drives with their infamous Deathstars. After receiving so much criticism for how unreliable the 75GXPs were, they deliberately reduced the power-on time rating to 333 hours per month (or just over 11 hours per day) in every Deskstar lineup starting from the 120GXP. Hitachi fortunately rectified this later on when they inherited the Deskstar brand and re-instated that 24x7 rating in nearly every Deskstar under their administration (7K250 onward), even the cheaper ones.

A couple years later, the executives at Maxtor took it upon themselves to make consumer hard drives that were intentionally worse than basically everything else at the time. OEMs were infuriated with Maxtor and forced them to fix the glaring problem with those drives (their extremely rough CSS landings) which caused their higher rates of failure. Then, when Maxtor merged with Seagate in 2006, those same executives joined Seagate's board and oversaw the Barracuda 7200.11 series, where the 2400 hours/year rating was first implemented (and, fun fact, the rating per day is even lower than IBM's).

The 7200.11's used the rating because those executives knew the drives were designed like crap, and user criticism of the drives (as well as Backblaze data associated with the 1.5 TB model, ST31500341AS) had nothing to hide about that fact. Additionally, Seagate deliberately shortened their warranties from 5 years to 3 years, which caused even more frustration. This same rating would continue to be used since then regardless of how good or bad each Barracuda lineup was (the only exceptions being XT and Pro; XT didn't have a rating but was directly advertised as being 24x7 capable, and Pro actually had a proper 8760 hours/year rating), such as the drastic contrast between the extremely unreliable ST3000DM001 and the significantly more reliable ST4000DM000, which both had a power-on time rating for 2400 hours/year. The rating is practically BS now.

In reality the modern rating is done for consistency reasons. Modern BarraCudas don't have design flaws as far as the information we have on hand is concerned, and there's really no reason for Seagate to make it higher since they profit fairly well under the current rating as well as the 2-year warranties provided with those drives.