The SSDs run Btrfs RAID1, and the others run Mergerfs with snapraid, so basically single drive. IronWolf��激����若�� ��激����若�阪�� IronWolf IronWolf Pro ������ 絽御��腮弱��PC���SOHO PC���NAS ��������激�鴻�������������潟�帥�若�������ゃ��NAS 絎拷�� 12TB���10TB���8TB���6TB���4TB���3TB���2TB���1TB 70+ WD Red's going strong 3+ years 24/7. Das kann technisch nicht schneller gehen, als eine einzelne Platte zu beschreiben. Nur Fragen / Antworten direkt zum Artikel. 99 Get it as ��� I've had 8 10TB Seagate Ironwolf with Data Recovery Rescue Service in my DS2415+ that I bought while I was in Afghanistan in July 2017 but didn't put into my Synology until I came back in Aug of 17. This means for me that WD Reds are my way to go. I had 2x 3tb Reds die in the first 3 months, both replaced on warranty. Tatsächlich verstärken sich die Vibrationen proportional zur Anzahl der eingesetzten Platten. But I am thinking about buying a new NAS and I just can't choose which drive. No: sort all drives available to you by Size*WarrantyLength/Price. Edit: the replacement for the 1st that died was a refurb, that also died. With just the 4 Reds + 2 SSDs, my NAS uses 35-38W “idle” (drives spinning), and with the two IronWolf drives added it consumes 50-55W idle. Mit den 2,5 Zoll Festplatten habe ich so gut wie keine Erfahrung, wir setzen bisher fast ausschließlich 3,5 Zoll Festplatten (meist. That’s the extra cost of running the IronWolf. Schneller und stabiler sind sicherlich Festplatten ohne SMR. I just haven't had the time to do an RMR to get another drive. NAS-Festplatten haben sich als am zuverlässigsten herausgestellt. Zum einen die Western Digital WD Red 10TB WD100EFAX) und zum anderen die Seagate IronWolf NAS HDD 10TB (ST10000VN0004). Den Energieverbrauch als wichtiger zu bewerten als die Performance der Festplatten, halte ich für eine extrem subjektive Präferenz. It's when you hit capacities 6TB and larger that they're 7200 RPM. Everyone has an opinion about it and a preference for his/her reasons. Looking at the 4TB options... Seagate drives are cheaper, faster (7200 rpm), has more cache (128-256 MB vs 64 MB), and use twice as much electricity (~8.1W vs 3.4W) when running. Went to Ironwolf's and noted they're not as quiet as the Red's, but the monitoring ability that Synology offers while using Ironwolf's is a better reassurance to when they might possibly fail as opposed to a Red just crapping out all of a sudden. Hatte ich leider auch schon einmal. Es gibt mittlerweile auch 3 und 4TB HDDs im 2,5" Format ohne SMR. I have both. I've used WD Red's for like 99% of my units. Die Seagate ist sogar etwas preiswerter. Du schreibst: "Dies verstärkt sich antiproportional pro weiterer Festplatte.". Show only OP | Page 2 of 2 < Prev 1 2 31 May 2017 at 10:03 #21 pc-guy Mobster Joined: 29 May ��� die. Problem ist, dass sich Kapazitäten ab 3 TB sonst nicht via 2,5 Zoll Festplatte realisieren lassen. Prices change daily, reliability is hit or miss with any brand, there cannot be a definitive advise other than above. Schwer zu sagen. So I am looking for a 6TB hard drive, and I was originally going for the WD black 6TB, but then I found the Seagate Ironwolf 6TB which offers NAS reliability, but for like 30% less than the WD ��� 2017-03-15 06:29:17 - ����������ó��添甜 Do piwnicy bra��bym Black (s�� obecnie ta��sze od Red!!) 7200rpm drives are faster but also louder/higher temps...depends what you are doing with the drives. Danke für die Info. Soll ich Seagate IronWolf oder Western Digital Red, WD Red Pro oder gar eine andere NAS-Festplatte kaufen? Habe die WD Red 6TB und die Seagate 4TB im Einsatz Pro für WD RED Leiserer Betrieb 29db anstatt 32db geringerer Stromverbrauch 6.4W (Betrieb), 5.2W (Leerlauf) zu 9.0W (Betrieb), 7.2W (Leerlauf) ��� Wenn Du eine E-Mail-Adresse angibst, informieren wir dich, sobald es hier etwas Neues gibt. Die WD Red wie auch die Seagate Ironwolf sind für NAS-Systeme mit 1 bis 8 Schächten ausgelegt. A NAS is probably idle 80-90% of the time, but consumption will of course be higher with load. Pick the first that hits the required total size target. I all depends on your use case I guess. Some have failed, those things happen ofcourse. Thanks for the info and your thoughts! If they fail I RMA them, if not, they’re installed. Bei Links, die mit einem * gekennzeichnet sind, handelt es sich um Affiliate-Links, bei denen wir bei einem Kauf eine Vergütung durch den Anbieter erhalten. Seagate Technology | Official Forums Team, At 4TB, the non-Pro IronWolf is 5900 RPM. I had one start showing that it was starting to fail. All my new drives are subjected to a 80+ hour “burn in” test. Kein Support für andere Hard- oder Software . z 5-letni�� gwarancj��. Now I have a normal Red with no problems to report. WD Red 6TB NAS Internal Hard Drive - 5400 RPM Class, SATA 6 Gb/s, SMR, 256MB Cache, 3.5" - WD60EFAX 4.3 out of 5 stars 1,226 CDN$ 199.05 Seagate IronWolf 6TB NAS Internal Hard Drive HDD ��� Nur dort werden die Daten auf alle Platten verteilt; bei RAID 1 werden sie auf alle Platten gleichzeitig geschrieben. The Seagate Ironwolf 6TB at worst leads by only 60% and at most ��� Any advise is greatly appreciated. Wir haben seit 2004 mehrere NAS am laufen, privat wie geschäftlich. The iron wolf drives of course also perform well in raid, but they also rock in single drive configurations. Some sooner than others, and some specific models are worse than others (looking at you WD Red 3TB!). Da sich unser Blog überwiegend mit NAS-Systemen für den privaten Bereich beschäftigt, ist für uns der Energieverbrauch wichtiger. Seagate��� ��� Beide Festplatten besitzen die gleiche Schnittstelle, nähmlich ein SATA-Anschluss mit 6 GB/s. Let's test it and see how fast it is compared to the competitor WD Red Pro 5 GB. My NAS is running 4x 8TB WD Red, 2x6TB IronWolf, and 2x1TB Samsung Evo 860. Its telling me I have 1125 bad sectors right now. Wenn es tatsächlich so wäre, dann würde man extra viele Platten nutzen. Gibt es im 2,5" Bereich irgendwelche Empfehlungen oder vergleichbare Produkte? I also have an almost new Seagate 4TB that doesn’t work. Copying a fragmented file from one Red to another will yield around 70-90 MB/s, and 100-120 MB/s on the IronWolf drives. Re: Dyski do NAS 4TB/6TB - WD RED, Seagate IronWolf? Again, the 3-year limited warranty is attractive compared with the usual. Du schriebst ja schon, dass es sich hier um die Toshiba MQ03ABB300 und Seagate ST3000LM016 handelt. Also running 2x 4tb Reds for 2 years without a hitch. Buy Seagate IronWolf 6TB NAS Hard Drive 7200 RPM 256MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s CMR 3.5" Internal HDD for RAID Network Attached Storage ST6000VN0033 with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Vergleich nicht ganz neutral vor. Based on 1,612 user benchmarks for the Seagate IronWolf (2016) and the WD Red (2019), we rank them both on effective speed and value for money against the best 1,014 HDDs. Konkret z.B. I have an old Seagate 105MB drive from 1991 that still works. Edit: changed intel to seagate. The IronWolf NAS models deliver slightly better ��� Even with this issue I would recommend them. Aber wegen der ��� Deze IronWolf Pro schijf heeft een hogere workload dan reguliere IronWolf ��� Das war in dem Fall damit gemeint. Seagate IronWolf 6TB NAS Internal Hard Drive HDD ��� 3.5 Inch SATA 6Gb/s 7200 RPM 256MB Cache for RAID Network Attached Storage (ST6000VN0033) 4.3 out of 5 stars 97 $188.99 $ 188. Ich selber bin nicht so der Fan von SMR und habe hier auch nur Erfahrungen mit der Seagate Archive Serie. De Seagate IronWolf Pro 6TB is een 3,5 inch harde schijf voor gebruik in een zakelijke NAS of een server met maximaal 24 bays. Depending on how many drives you plan to install, and the electricity cost,the Reds may be a cheaper solution. Toshiba MQ03ABB300 und Seagate ST3000LM016. Hier steht "Zusätzlich hat ein RAID 1, RAID 5 oder RAID 6 Verbund den Vorteil, dass sich die Lese- und Schreibgeschwindigkeit in Vergleich zu einer einzelnen Festplatte deutlich erhöht, da die Dateien auf alle Festplatten gleichmäßig verteilt werden". Die Spindelgeschwindigkeit beträgt bei allen WD Red-Modellen 5400 U/min, während die Seagate Ironwolf mit einer Kapazität von 6TB ��� So maybe the 3TB ones are to look out for. Seagate IronWolf, 6TB (256MB cache, 5400rpm) Mijn eerste Seagate in ruim 15 jaar (slechte ervaring in het verleden), maar na het CMR/SMR-debakel van WD-Red heb ik voor mijn nieuwe ��� 2 failures which were replaced immediately through warranty. The Seagate IronWolf Pro 6 TB is a NAS hard disk drive. If you want speed, go Seagate, if you want to save power, go WD. Where I live that amounts to $20/year. Regardless of what you choose, make sure you make backups, as any drive will fail at some point. Price are somewhat the same. IronWolf è molto più avanti del branco - Segate® comprende le sfide di memorizzazione dei dati specifiche dei clienti e ha ideato le unità disco per sistemi NAS IronWolf® e IronWolf Pro da 18 TB per ��� I run a destructive badblocks test on them with 5 full passes. The site may not work properly if you don't, If you do not update your browser, we suggest you visit, Press J to jump to the feed. Bei einem RAID 1 hast Du allerdings die doppelte Lesegeschwindigkeit. Some have failed, those things happen ofcourse. Compra Disco Duro para NAS Seagate IronWolf 3.5'', 6TB, ST6000VN0041 a un precio accesible. Selecting hard drives flowchart is as follows: Yes: pick the quietest by the reported acoustic noise levels in the datasheet. ���譬� ��������� ������������ IronWolf Seagate®��� 螻�螳���� 螻������� ��一�危�� ��ろ��襴�讌� 覓語��襯� ��危�危����� 覈���� �����煙�� ������ IronWolf® 覦� IronWolf Pro 16TB NAS(��ろ�語����� ��郁屋 ��ろ��襴�讌�) ������ �����殊�企��襯� 豢���������給�����. So no switching brands for me :). Here the Ironwolf absolutely decimates the older WD Black, as it should since it costs about $200 and is a few years newer. And they have special software build in. HDs: 6x Seagate IronWolf 8TB HD Fans: 2x Noctua 92mm NF-A9 PWM Exhaust Fan: Noctua 140mm NF-A14 PWM ESXi Boot device: Samsung 960 Evo 250GB M.2 PCI NVMe SSD ��� Had Red's for 2 years or so but then one of them showed it was starting to fail. But I am thinking about buying a new NAS and I just ��� The additional power consumption of a single IronWolf (6TB, ST6000VN0033, 8.1W idle) vs a single 6TB WD Red (3.4W idle), amounts to 41.2 kWh/year. My question to you experienced Plex users is whether there is any negatives to going with the 7200 RPM of the 6TB over the 5900 RPM of the 4TB drives. Irgendwie kommt mir der Artikel bzw. So in the end, go for the specs that suits your purpose. WD Red It is a little more expensive but not enough to affect our decision. the added "health" info with the Seagates doesn't mean much to be but some people love it... Tell me now, which sizes are the wd reds? Is write cache still disabled for the 4TB model? Du musst also entscheiden was für dich wichtiger ist. Hey OP. Es kommt auf den Einsatzzweck an, ob man nun den Energieverbrauch oder die Leistung bevorzugt. As for stability, all brands have failures. Reds perform well in any kind of striped raid configuration (0,5,6,10), but aren’t as strong in single drive layouts. WD Red* 10 TB 1.000.000 h 210 MB/s 0,5 W 2,8 W 5,7 W WD Red* Pro 10 TB 1.000.000 h 240 MB/s 0,5 W 2,8 W 5,7 W Seagate Ironwolf* 10 TB 1.000.000 h 210 MB/s 0,8 W 5,0 W 7,8 W Seagate Ironwolf��� The Winner Is- The Seagate IronWolf Read next ��� WD Red vs ��� If your main usage is a NAS, both drives will easily saturate a gigabit connection, but in a single drive configuration, the Reds may struggle to keep up with simultaneous IO. Seagate IronWolf Pro 6TB NAS Internal Hard Drive HDD ��� CMR 3.5 Inch Sata 6Gb/s 7200 RPM 256MB Cache for Raid Network Attached Storage, Data Recovery Service ��� Frustration Free Packaging ��� Die. Aren't the Seagates faster? No other factors matter in the nas applications (rpm, cache size, monitoring gimmicks, helium, yadayada). Besides from that I have no issues with any of them. Wenn Du dir nicht sicher bist, retourniere die Festplatte und bestelle die nochmal neu. I've used WD Red's for like 99% of my units. E-Mail Benachrichtigung bei neuen Artikeln. Seagate IronWolf 3.5" �����若�水奨���3綛岩�� 6TB ������HDD(CMR) 3綛岩��荐� 24������腮弱�� PC NAS ��� RV��祉�潟�泣��ST6000VN001/FFP 5��ゆ�����������4.2 184 鐃�16,141 鐃�16,141 Der Cache wird dir bei vielen kleinen Dateien helfen. Western Digital WD Red WD80EFAX(8TB) 3 18,800 0 20,185-1,015 Western Digital WD Red WD60EFAX(6TB) 6 17,380-200 18,682-70 Western Digital WD Red WD40EFAX(4TB) 5 15,180-88 ��� IronWolf 6TB ��� das musst Du wissen: NAS-Festplatte für den Dauerbetrieb hohe Zuverlässigkeit und lange Haltbarkeit 256 MB großer Cache Die Seagate IronWolf 6TB wurde speziell für anspruchsvolle ��� The 6TB WD Red is also the lowest-priced 6TB currently in the table, but it is a SMR drive and is not recommended for most use-cases. ��� First off, thanks for considering Seagate, regardless of which route you determine is the right fit for your needs in the end! Excelente servicio 30.000+ productos 12 años en el mercado 200.000+ clientes Es probable que se ��� So I believe there is no difference. This makes your hard ��� I have about 9 WD Red 3TB that all have failed, and as many 2,4 TB drives that still work after years of service. Once you know, ��� Das ist so nicht korrekt im Fall von RAID 1, hier ist wohl eher RAID 0 gemeint. Both brands are top notch and both can fail the same. IronWolf 4TB vs 6TB ��� The WD Red and Seagate IronWolf have separate, but similar techniques to work better with your NAS. Run any disk for long enough and it will fail. At 4TB, the non-Pro IronWolf is 5900 RPM. Zumal alle Festplatten mehr als ausreichend Leistung für die Datenübertragung über das Netzwerk haben. Trotzdem kannst Du auch normale Festplatten im 2,5 Zoll Format verwenden, wie z.B. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts. Seagate ��激�若�蚊�ゃ�� �����泣����若�������c�鴻�� IronWolf NAS 6TB ( 3.5��ゃ�潟�� / SATA 6Gb/s / 5400rpm / 3綛岩��荐� ) 罩h�颮後�ュ�� IronWolf��������ゃ�����筝����絎九梱���SOHO�����������割賢絨頳閞>��罐����������1������8�����ゃ��NAS ��� Seagate IronWulf ist ehr vergleichbar mit WD Red Pro / Seagate SkyHawk ist ehr vergleichbar mit WD Red Beide Hersteller bieten verschiedene Serien an: bei WD geht es im NAS-Bereich ja von der Red über die Red ��� Buy Seagate IronWolf 6TB NAS Hard Drive 7200 RPM 128MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5&#34; Internal Hard Drive ST6000VN0041 with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast, News, discussion, and community support for Synology devices, Looks like you're using new Reddit on an old browser. I’m tired :-), Damn this is extensive! Spielt in dem Zusammenhang SMR eine Rolle? Könnte ein Defekt durch unsachgemäßen Transport sein. @ Tom: das ist natürlich korrekt. Your NAS is on 24 hours a day, constantly writing and reading data. WD Red Vs Seagate Ironwolf (NAS) Discussion in 'Storage Drives' started by RSR, 18 Feb 2017. It's when you hit capacities 6TB and larger that they're 7200 RPM, as can be seen here: If you'd like to learn more about our IHM (IronWolf Health Management) software you mentioned, you can go to this page. You will not find an answer.