What 3tb for a Microserver?

Nodds · 26 Apr 2014 at 20:44

Hi,

I have a N36L Microserver sitting in a cupboard with a few wee drives in it. It's typically used to serve music and films to a variety of clients. I'm just about to run out of space so now looking to add in a few 3tb drives.

I operate WHS 2011 with Lights-Out to put the box in and out of hibernation.
Mon-Thursday the box only comes on from 17:30-23:59 and it's then on from Friday evening until Sunday evening.

Have been thinking about adding WD Red drives to the box but had recently read it may not be worth it as I'm not operating on a 24/7 basis.

Would I be as well going for a WD Green instead? Or something else?

Thoughts?

Cheers

Nodds

On Holiday · 26 Apr 2014 at 20:46

EDIT:

Green might be worth considering if it isn't being used that often then.

If you can afford to put Reds in there then go Red

demon8991 · 26 Apr 2014 at 22:21

My advice would be to go for the 3TB Red drive.

It is only £10 more than the Green comes with a 3 year warranty instead of a 2 year one and also is designed for much longer usage than a Green.

It may also be worth considering the 4TB version which can be had for £130 on OcUK.

kefan77 · 26 Apr 2014 at 22:25

Red is certainly very good option, but you might also consider 3TB Toshiba drives.

MagicBoy · 26 Apr 2014 at 22:30

I went with the 3TB Toshiba (previously Hitachi) for my FreeNAS Microserver.

Significantly cheaper, and ZFS doesn't need the TLER benefits of the NAS range drives. They replaced the 1TB Hitachi's which never so much as blinked in 4+ years.

demon8991 · 26 Apr 2014 at 22:37

For me though the 3 Year warranty of the Red drives is definitely worth it for the extra £20.

Plus I believe Western Digital are much more reliable than the Toshiba drives.

MagicBoy · 26 Apr 2014 at 22:43

demon8991 said:
For me though the 3 Year warranty of the Red drives is definitely worth it for the extra £20.

Plus I believe Western Digital are much more reliable than the Toshiba drives.

I decided it wasn't, although the price difference was about £30 at the time I bought. A failed drive is a failed drive, you still lose the data. Would have been better value to buy a fifth drive and just shove it a drawer than pay extra for a longer warranty.

In my (work related) experience Hitachi consistently beats WD for reliability. I wouldn't touch a Seagate with a bargepole.

kefan77 · 26 Apr 2014 at 22:48

MagicBoy said:
In my (work related) experience Hitachi consistently beats WD for reliability. I wouldn't touch a Seagate with a bargepole.

is this your work?

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2089...eals-the-most-reliable-hard-drive-makers.html

also, I've been using Seagate drives for years and not had one fail on me. But I only owned like 12 altogether so might been pure luck.

MagicBoy · 26 Apr 2014 at 22:55

Nah, but it tallies up in my experience with a couple of thousand desktops using those drives.

/Awaits a Seagate fanboi to pick at the sampling methods etc.

... and yes I realise I've got a 7200.14 in my sig. It's all they had and it only has Steam games on it. Any data I care about is on the NAS.

Nodds · 26 Apr 2014 at 23:57

I was under the impression that the N36 was restricted to 3tb due to the motherboard/Bios. Anyone know if that's not the case?

And no issues with regular power up/downs on the Red drive?

randal · 26 Apr 2014 at 23:59

Reds.

demon8991 · 27 Apr 2014 at 00:14

Nodds said:
I was under the impression that the N36 was restricted to 3tb due to the motherboard/Bios. Anyone know if that's not the case?

And no issues with regular power up/downs on the Red drive?

I can't comment on the N36 bios but I have two 3TB Red drives in mirrored mode in my desktop (soon to go into a NAS) and they have been flawless ever since I bought them on their release date. My PC gets switched on and off daily.