Western Digital black or seagate barracuda hybrid drive?

Discussion in 'Computer Memory and Hard Drives' started by keller, Mar 20, 2019.

  1. keller

    keller New Member

    Messages:
    9
    I've been contemplating since a week now and can't seem to decide between the WD black and seagate hybrid drive, technically https://appuals.com/best-hard-drives-for-gaming/ after seeing this article I got confused, I was originally going to purchase the western digital blue, can anybody tell me are hybrid hard drives worth it?
     
  2. JaredDM

    JaredDM Active Member

    Messages:
    109
    WD all the way. Seagate SSHDs keep showing up with heads stuck to the platters needing data recovery. WD ones don't seem to be having any common failure issues. Or, if you really want to spluge, get the Toshiba one and have double the flash memory.

    A hybrid drive certainly won't be as fast as a full SSD, but it can provide some faster boot times than just a HDD while still having more capacity than a budget SSD.
     
  3. johnb35

    johnb35 Administrator Staff Member

    Messages:
    41,507
  4. JaredDM

    JaredDM Active Member

    Messages:
    109
    Just don't trust a no-name brand SSD like that with any critical data that isn't well backed up. Most brands like that are using downgraded NAND that was deemed unacceptable by a name brand and they use it anyway. There's probably 2-3Tb worth of NAND in there and they just used the pages of the chips that were still functional.

    I'm not usually a big advocate for name brands, but with SSDs there's a reason a major company wouldn't put their name on it. Only a few companies are actually making the memory, companies like this are just reusing junk parts.

    But, I agree that with the price drop of SSDs it's hardly worth considering hybrid drives.
     
  5. OmniDyne

    OmniDyne Active Member

    Messages:
    478
    It uses the SM2258 controller, so based on pricing it's likely using either Micron 32-layer 384Gbit NAND (used in the ADATA SU800/ SX850) or 32-layer 256Gbit NAND. This means endurance will at least be on par or possibly even beyond the MX500, depending on over-provisioning. Obviously the main benefit of the Micron 256Gb 64-layer flash used in the MX500 is higher sustained write performance after pSLC cache exhaustion; not really a big deal under consumer workloads.

    Well, seeing as it uses the SM2258 with at least an adequate amount of DRAM (as evidenced by performance results) in addition to a 3-year warranty, I personally think it's a solid budget drive.
     
  6. Intel_man

    Intel_man VIP Member

    Messages:
    5,695
    Jared's more concerned about off brand companies using leftover NAND flashes that didn't meet Micron's QC for use in their own drives. Which typically means something is wrong with them, leading to premature failures. Which seems to be evident in the reviews where the negative comments indicate failure within a month of use (I'm referring to the drive John linked).
     
  7. JaredDM

    JaredDM Active Member

    Messages:
    109
    Exactly this. And that's why my original comment was to not trust any critical data that isn't well backed up on such an SSD.

    I'm not saying it isn't a good price consumer SSD and you might get one that works out well. But, you might also end up needing to make a warranty claim and losing all the data on it if you get a dud.
     
  8. OmniDyne

    OmniDyne Active Member

    Messages:
    478
    I see what you're saying, but I typically don't put much faith in negative reviews. Even Anandtech received a faulty EVO SSD sent directly to them from Samsung for review.

    A tried and true controller should mostly mitigate the negatives of using "downgraded" NAND. That's if Team Group does this, which there's no evidence they do.
     
  9. JaredDM

    JaredDM Active Member

    Messages:
    109
    No matter how good the controller is, it still doesn't magically save your data should even one NAND die.
     
  10. OmniDyne

    OmniDyne Active Member

    Messages:
    478
    Do Team Group SSDs die more frequently than Samsung SSDs? Because I've sure seen several Samsung drives die.
     
  11. JaredDM

    JaredDM Active Member

    Messages:
    109
    It largely depends on the specific NAND memory and controller used. If you get something like a Samsung 850 PRO it'll be using Toshiba NANDs and probably will long outlast its meaningful life. EVO is good, probably is using Samsung's own NAND but not quite as good as the PRO. Then you get to some of the budget ones and they're probably using some cheaper NAND like silicon micron or something and are more prone to failure.

    But, like anything, you can always get a couple of duds even when you're buying the name brand stuff. It's just more common with the no-name brands.
     
  12. OmniDyne

    OmniDyne Active Member

    Messages:
    478
    My question was rhetorical ha. The answer is we don't know if Team Group SSDs die faster compared to the competition.

    The 850 Pro used Samsung 32-layer 40nm 86Gbit MLC V-NAND. Toshiba works with Sandisk/ Western Digital, Micron was partnered with Intel. The WD Blue 3D and Sandisk Ultra 3D use a variation of Toshiba BiCS3 3D NAND.

    Toshiba was throwing their planar 15nm TLC and MLC NAND into some pretty crappy SSDs without DRAM buffers for a while. You can still buy them new, actually, and the performance and endurance is abysmal.

    You mean Micron? Micron's 64-layer 256Gbit 3D TLC NAND is some of the best on the market. It's used in the MX500 and the higher end EX920 and SX8200 NVMe SSDs and is competitive with Samsung V-NAND in terms of endurance and performance. In fact, SSDs utilizing Micron NAND easily outperform the Samsung 970 EVO in certain metrics thanks to superior pSLC caching methods. The Intel/ Micron 64-layer NAND used in the EX920 actually has a higher endurance rating over the 970 EVO. Even the Intel 660p utilizing Intel 64-layer 1024Gb 3D QLC can easily outperform the 970 EVO in random performance. Micron's older 384Gbit 32-layer 3D TLC still carries some of the highest endurance on the market, far beyond that of the 970 EVO.

    I just don't buy this, and Team Group is pretty well established at this point.
     
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2019
  13. Intel_man

    Intel_man VIP Member

    Messages:
    5,695
    Not unless someone leaks out the data for the amount of drives sold vs the amount of drives sent back due to RMA.

    Without knowing that from both brands on these exact products, I can't with statistical confidence tell you who's doing better with their reliability.
     
  14. OmniDyne

    OmniDyne Active Member

    Messages:
    478

    Right, so we can look at the internals of the drive to give us a hint as to whether or not Team Group is manufacturing an inferior product; historically, manufacturer's have taken well documented measures to reduce costs, such as omitting DRAM, using an older or inferior controller, using planar NAND. Team Group had the option to go with the older Phison S10 controller or even toss out DRAM and go Phison S11 or even SM2258XT; this would have the largest impact on pricing and performance. TG chose arguably one of the best controllers on the market in addition to popular and proven NAND (whether it be Micron 32-layer 384Gbit, 256Gbit, or 64-layer 256Gbit). DRAM is a big bonus and adds significantly to endurance, but also price.


    I asked a few experts about this and about the Team Group 3D drive in particular. SSD grade NAND flash is regulated by JEDEC/ ONFI; Micron (and IMFT [Intel-Micron Flash Technologies]) actively collaborate with them and adhere to their standards (in North America, of course).

    ADATA is one of the few (if not the only) third-party SSD manufacturer that rigorously bins the NAND they purchase; their binning standards are higher than that of Micron. This means, technically speaking, that an ADATA SSD utilizing Micron 256Gb 64-layer 3D TLC could consistently contain higher grade NAND than what Crucial uses for the MX500.

    It should be noted that Crucial is owned by Micron.

    The experts claim there's no reason to believe that Team Group SSDs utilizing "lower grade" NAND are subject to higher failure rates.

    There's actually no indication that using lower grade NAND fails more; what's obvious is that endurance and performance can be affected, but again, the controller, amount of DRAM, ECC, etc. have as big of an impact. Flash drives obviously utilize lower grade NAND but they also utilize inferior controllers and technology all around.


    https://www.spectek.com/docs/SpectekNANDBuyersGuide.pdf



    I asked specifically about this as well; they're not aware of any SSD manufacturer doing this. Seeing as how NAND is the most expensive part of an SSD and produced per die, this practice doesn't make much sense anyways and I've never seen a professional reviewer mention this as a thing. NAND is generally warranted. Seems like a lot of trouble regardless.



    Every brand does this. Samsung even sells OEM client SSDs with varying hardware (PM, SM series) without DRAM. In markets outside of North America even Crucial SSDs have been found to contain varying hardware. Because the US has higher standards (consumer protections) SSD grade NAND is guaranteed.


    I have not once seen a professional reviewer mention this as something that should be considered when purchasing an SSD. Considering just about every "reputable" manufacturer sells cheaper and often DRAM-less versions of their flagship SSDs anyways (Crucial BX500, ADATA SU650/ SU655 or SU630, Western Digital/ SanDisk with slightly re-branded newer 3D models that are difficult to differentiate from their older garbage-tier DRAM-less planar NAND models) it really doesn't make sense to choose the lowest possible grade of flash in an SSD. The ultra cheap SSDs typically utilize 15nm planar NAND anyways.
     
    Last edited: Apr 3, 2019

Share This Page