Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

^

I'll be adding another 3TB red drive to my NAS to expand the storage, already used >70% of the current 6TB (9TB RAID 5).

But I'm not sure what to replace the died green drive with, will manily be used as a scratch disk for Torrent downloads (which could remain on there for 1/2 a year or more, seeing how I usually only move it over to the NAS once I got an entire season of TV shows/Animes).

Thinking of just grabing a WD blue (only $60ish) or shell out for a 1TB black ($90ish)?

Then again, my main game drive (1TB Samsung 7.2k rpm) is almost full, so I might use it for games storage too, which would mean black is faster for that vs blue?

Staying as far away from the greens that's for sure...

I recently replaced 2 2TB WD green drives in a RAID 1 array. one drive just stopped registering with the RAID card the card kept throwing out errors for that drive.

now have 2 6TB WD reds. I never knew the greens had a problem till now

Well I ended up buying a 3TB red and a 2TB black.

Installed the red on to my NAS & rebuilt the RAID in my NAS, meanwhile trying to savage what ever I can from the dead Green before I replace it with the black.

I'm guessing I should consider upgrading my current OS SSD (old 128GB Cruical M4) to a bigger SSD, is Intel SSDs still the king in terms of long term reliability? Thinking of getting a 480GB Intel 730...

My Cruical has being fine, bar one firmware bug (causing it to freeze up every hour after it has clocked a certain # of hours of on time), but that was fixed with a firmware update.

Edited by Mayuri Krab
  • 3 weeks later...

Have a read of the data here, and be sure to look at the past articles.

https://www.backblaze.com/blog/best-hard-drive/

Very helpful insight. I'm grabbing a bunch of HGST drives next week for my QNAP T699-Pro that I just purchased (going for 16TB in RAID6)

I was going to build a FreeNAS box with the plan to expand out to 24-30TB later on but to do that the initial hardware was gonna be around the $1200 marker and for $879 the 6-bay QNAP will do once they release support for 5TB retail drives (currently only 4TB retail supported).

Hi All,

Thought I'd post here about a recent problem I've been having that I can't quite wrap my head around.

I've recently received a new 240gb Sandisk Extreme Pro SSD to use with my aging system.

It has been close to 100% stable in current configuration with platter type Samsung 1TB system drive.

As soon as I install the OS (have tried windows 7 and windows 8.1 64bit) on my SSD, I will generally get a few hours into the fresh install before the BSOD's start. Usually saying some sort of system file has been corrupted.

System config as follows:

Stable at 30mins of Prime 95 Blend with peak cpu temp of 54C and peak cpu core temps of 45C

Asus M4A87TD/USB3 NB clocked to 2600MHz @ 1.275V

AMD Phenom X2 555 black unlocked to X4 B55 @ 200MHz x 18 (3.6GHz @ 1.38Vcore)

Corsair H100 cooler

4 x 2GB Geil DDR3 -1600 Ram running @ 1333MHz (667MHz x 2) 9 9 9 24 33 2T Timings @ 1.5V

MSI HD7900 Radeon Twin Frozr

Corsair HX750 PSU

Corsair Obsidian Case

Samsung 1TB System Drive

Samsung 2TB Storage Drive

WD 3TB Green Storage Drive

Sandisk 240GB Extreme Pro SSD - trying to use as system drive.

If I BSOD with SSD as boot disk, then jump into BIOS and change back to 1TB drive as boot disk everything is good again.

Thanks for any suggestions you guys might have, I'm at a loss as to what else it could be. Almost resigned to updating the build.

Edited by «Cyph3r»

Found the issue, oddly enough turned out to be core 2 was not happy being unlocked and handling ssd transfer rates.

Even tried underclocking the cpu to 2.8GHz with various voltages and still wasn't happy. BSOD's on boot. 2 cores was solid as a rock even overclocked with SSD. 3 cores was also fine if I avoided core 2, could run prime 95, transfer files, download in background and watch videos all simultaneously. As soon as I turned on any combination with core 2 involved and the SSD, bam, BSOD on boot.

Went back to overclocked unlocked quad core setup on platter drive until I work out whether to go a used phenom ii x4 965 and retain the rest or commit to a mobo/cpu/ram/gpu upgrade.

& looks like another WD green drive is about to die... f**king these must be the biggest unreliable POS ever made.

EDIT: I still got 2 more of these green drives left, lets see how long these f**kers can last...

Feel your pain man, my total is 6x 2TB WD greens. Never again....

I've moved over to the seagate SV35's. havent had a problem running 1 year 24/7 as of yet * touch wood*. but need to save up for another 900D so i can upgrade the server.

  • 8 months later...

So my 8 year old PC is finally on it's last legs... Making all sorts of sounds it shouldn't.

Currently pricing up a Mini ITX gaming PC as i'm sick of the space full towers take up. Cost wise the new stuff is pretty reasonably priced. I think i'm looking at $2500 all up including a new shiney monitor as mine are hella old.

I'm having an issue finding a suitable GPU. From what i can find there is only 1 GPU currently out (an Asus gtx 970) worth buying that will fit in my case, as i only have 200mm to work with.

And the new cards come out early next year, it's probably worth the wait....So should i just put up with a PC that sounds like satans spawn? Apparently the new cards are heaps better.

So my old PC died last week....

Queue the new little grunty asshole.

  • Gigabyte GA-Z170N-Gaming 5 Motherboard
  • Intel Core i7 6700K
  • Corsair Vengeance LPX 2133 16GB DDR4
  • ASUS GeForce® GTX 970 DC Mini
  • Intel 535 Series 240GB 2.5in SSD
  • Western Digital WD Black WD7500BPKX 750GB

All shoved inside a Lian Li

Odd-Curved-Mini-ITX-PC-Case-Launched-by-

Just finished building it and it's updating. Can't wait to test it properly.

That's an interesting looking case, what's it look like from the top?

Also what's the idea behind the design?

the idea was i'm sick of full towers taking up the space.

This has just as much power as a full tower, just tiny. The case is heaps smaller than it looks. sorta get a feeling for it's size when you see it next to the keyboard.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Very decent bit of kit. Definitely black it out I reckon.  
    • Because people who want that are buying euros. The people with the money to buy the aftermarket heads and blocks aren’t interested in efficiency or making -7 power, they’re making well over 1,000hp and pretty much only drive them at full throttle  best way to way make money is know your customer base and what they want and don’t spend money making things they don’t want. 
    • It's not, but it does feel like a bit of a missed opportunity regardless. For example, what if the cylinder head was redesigned to fit a GDI fuel system? It's worth like two full points of compression ratio when looking at modern GDI turbo vs PFI turbo. I'm pretty reliably surprised at how much less turbo it takes to make similar power out of a modern engine vs something like an RB26. Something with roughly the same dimensions as a -7 on an S55 is making absolutely silly power numbers compared to an RB26. I know there's a ton of power loss from things like high tension rings, high viscosity oil, clutch fan, AWD standby loss, etc but it's something like 700 whp in an F80 M3 vs 400 whp in an R33 GTR. The stock TF035HL4W turbos in an F80 M3 are really rather dinky little things and that's enough to get 400 whp at 18 psi. This just seems unwise no? I thought the general approach is if you aren't knock limited the MFB50 should be held constant through the RPM range. So more timing with RPM, but less timing with more cylinder filling. A VE-based table should accordingly inverse the VE curve of the engine.
    • I've seen tunes from big name workshops with cars making in excess of 700kW and one thing that stood out to me, is that noone is bothering with torque management. Everyone is throwing in as much timing as the motor can take for a pull. Sure that yields pretty numbers on a dyno, but it's not keeping these motors together for more than a few squirts down the straight without blowing coolant or head gaskets. If tuners, paid a bit more attention and took timing out in the mid range, managed boost a bit better, you'll probably see less motors grenading. Not to name names, or anything like that, but I've seen a tune, from a pretty wild GT-R from a big name tuner and I was but perplexed on the amount of timing jammed into it. You would have expected a quite a bit less timing at peak torque versus near the limiter, but there was literally 3 degrees of difference. Sure you want to make as much as possible throughout the RPM range, but why? At the expense of blowing motors? Anyhow I think we've gone off topic enough once again lol.
    • Because that’s not what any of them are building these heads or blocks for. It’s to hold over over 1000hp at the wheels without breaking and none of that stuff is required to make power 
×
×
  • Create New...