on February 27, 2013
I used to only buy Seagate drives, and at the time most came with 5 year warranty, the best in the biz. But now most are 3 year warranty, and I have had multiple drives fail shortly after the 3 year mark. They will not work out any kind of replacement or discount once past the warranty, so I am essentially out $150 plus for "top of the line" drives. Based on my recent experience I am now using a competitor (Toshiba), hoping they are better. So far their drives are quieter, and performance in line with Seagate. The ONLY thing I still like about Seagate is their utilities for testing drives that have errors and have failed. But I would much rather have a drive that doesn't fail, and not need to use that software. So I guess their priorities are in the wrong place.
on September 26, 2014
Seagate drives fail, they fail often and they fail hard. They have worse reliability than floppy disks (yeah I'm that old).
Bottomline, I've had 7 out of 10 drives fail within a *single year*. Purchased October 23, 2013. All failed in the months leading to Sept 2014. That's a 70% failure rate so far. I don't think it's going to stop there. The 3 remaning drives could die at any time.
So, replacement? To add insult to the injury, new replacements are over $180, competition is $82. What's the logic behind that? Can Seagate elaborate? Perhaps they are losing so much business they need to jack up the prices on the current inventory to keep afloat?
Do yourself a favor and consider other alternatives, Seagate drives are *not* worth any consideration at all.
Seagate quality is terrible and is getting worse. Several things support this trend.
1. Barracuda drives use to have a five year warranty - activated on the date of sale. Through the years, the warranty has gone down to three and then to two years - beginning on the date of manufacture. According to one study, manufacturing, shipping, distribution, sale often take six months. If my math is correct, the typical warranty is really 1.5 years at best. If Seagate is so confident of its products and their reliability, why has it reduced hard drive warranty by 333%?
2. From personal experience, I purchased six SATA 2TB Barracudas in the past two years. All died within one month to 1.1 years of usage. Two were OEMs from Asus CM1831 computer systems. Four were retail purchases from Frys Electronics. Because of premature deaths, two were sent back factory for replacements. So, I technically experienced eight 2TB Seagate Barracuda failures in a very short time.
My experience was not a rare aberration or bad luck. If you just check the Amazon user reviews, one popular hard drive models registers a 20% total dissatisfaction rating - two stars and lower. The typical complaints are DOA and short life. Of the millions of computer users who use Seagates, this percentage extrapolates to a huge number of defective merchandise. . . . Poor quality seems to be the normal.
3. Scientific and empirical research supports my experiences. On April 10, 2015, EXTREMTECH reported a BackBlaze study. The research took 41,000 hard drives from all the major manufacturers and ran them 24/7 until they failed. For the record, there were 15,528 Seagates, 22,902 Hitachies, 1,174 Western Digitals, and 47 Toshibas. They consisted of almost all the various products: consumer, NAS, and enterprise server units. The researchers tallied the score. Seagates had a 40% failure rate - 2,857% worse than HGST, a WD subsidiary.
The research was updated on December 11, 2015. BackBlaze detailed the failure rate among hard drives purchased on three years. Seagate had the highest. Among 1TB hard drives, this brand had the following failure rates: 2013 - 129.88%, 2014 - 66.01%, and 2015 - 222.77%. Among 2TB drives, the failure rates were better: 2013 - 43.08%, 2014 - 30.94%, and 2015 - 28.46%.
As a comparison, the highest failure rate for its 1TB competitors is much lower. Western Digital Green had the following: 2013 - 4.29%, 2014 - 3.90%, and 2015 - 9.91%. Toshiba claimed the record for competing 2TB drives: 2013 - 6.93%, 2014 - 3.68%, and 2015 - 2.80%.
on February 4, 2013
I purchased 3 of these green drives for a home NAS to use RAID 5. The first two failed within 6 months and the 3rd one went yesterday. I purchased in March 2012. Seagate charges for advanced replacement. I have NEVER had a hard drive fail before so for these all to fail within 12 months, I was very let down by the company. The only positive note is that I can say the return process was painless even though it did cost like $15 to do the replacement.
Find something of better quality like WDC or Hitachi. I cheaped out with these and in the end, it bit me.
on October 26, 2012
Seagate Barracuda Green 2TB SATA 6Gb/s 64MB Cache 3.5-Inch Internal Bare Drive ST2000DL003.
I bought this HD Brand NEW right here from Amazon, I've rarely used it...Not even a Year yet and it went bad on me...it started to make a funny sound...I called Seagate they told me to get all my files out of this HD (good and free service) but that doesn't help, it's good for 3 years warranty, so I sent it back to Seagate...now I'm waiting to get a Refurbished one back, (not a NEW one) and they told me if this one goes bad too it's not their falt they will not replace it again...I should have bought some other brand.
on January 3, 2013
My first drive was a 20 meg Seagate drive which cost more than this one. Sadly, I bought one less than six months ago, and it failed with less than 3100 hours on it (from SMART).
But what prompted me to write the review was the fact that the warranty-*REPLACEMENT* drive is also junk. The original was manufactured in China, the replacement (refurbished) in Korea. Interestingly the refurbished drive shows 0 hours in SMART, so evidently they are able to reset the counters.
So, replacement drive is failing after less than 48 hours. "The device, \Device\Harddisk2\D, has a bad block."
Caveat emptor. This was supposed to be a RAID-1 companion to a WD drive:
amazon dot com/RE4-Enterprise-Hard-Drive-WD2003FYYS/dp/B002XW44QY
I am extremely impressed w/ the WD drive. I'm currently doing a robocopy of 1.5 T of data, and the WD is significantly faster than the Seagate (plus, the WD doesn't lock up & throw a bunch of errors). chkdsk on the wd was an order of magnitude faster than the equivalent Seagate drive.
Over on newegg, I see similar complaints about Seagate's plummet, esp. wrt their "rebranding" of Samsung. If you're about to purchase a Samsung drive assuming you'll get the same quality, beware, since Seagate bought them out.