Are NAS drives actually better? Another WD Red failure.

[Randall8686]

I have a fairly big (12 drive) unraid server. When I first built the server many years ago I used a mix of drives and as drives have failed I have replaced and grown it with WD red drives. 2 days ago I had my third WD Red total failure the drive was 5 years old my previous red failures are again 5 and 7 years old.

It got me looking at some of the very old drives still in the system. Well the longest standing drives are seagate with the oldest being a “seagate Samsung spinpoint” that is about 10 years old and still showing zero signs of failure. They are both not nas drives. My disks are spun up 24/7 as the server is accesses many times a day so it got me thinking are NAS drives actually all that? From my obviously very limited exposure to drive failures the ones that have failed on me the most are the ones “designed” for the task.

what is others experience in this?

 

[Randall8686]

I've had two WD Reds start to fail last week, about two weeks out of warranty. Cut me losses and converted to Seagate Ironwolf. The drives are significantly quieter than my WD reds were and seem faster already.

to be honest i dont care for noise or speed as they are in a server well out the way and the speed of the drives can saturate gigabit Ethernet so i wont gain anything. but it has made me order another drive too have two parity drive's. although the most important data is backed up into Gdrive i have too much data to store it all off site so although its not the end of the world if it goes i would much prefer not to loose all my RAW files. But i have about 15TB of video files from my cameras