Also what would be a good caddy for such drives, similar style to Lacie?
2006-12-21 11:11:49 · 7 answers · asked by Soulhealer 1 in Computers & Internet ➔ Hardware ➔ Other - Hardware
Not in my experiance, the faster ones, and expecially in my experiance SATA HDDs are more prone to failure than normal IDE ones. But the size shouldn't matter.
2006-12-21 11:14:59 · answer #1 · answered by darklordkain 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hi there. I'm an A+ certified PC technician with years of expirence. Higher capacity drives are not more prone to failure than smaller size drives. Every Hard drive is gonna crash someday, so always have another hard drive as a backup. (A piece of advise; hard drives tend to get EXTREAMLY HOT, so get yourself a good cooling system for them. Keeping them cool will extend the life of the HDD, and inturn make your life a whole lot easier).
2006-12-21 11:31:43 · answer #2 · answered by Wissam E 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
storagereview.com has an excellent Reliability Survey. From my experience, small form factor (laptop) drives fail more than desktop drives, and my 4-30gb drives tended to last longer than my 100+gb drives. Of course I paid 3 times as much for the smaller ones. Quality control seems to have suffered.
2006-12-21 11:25:07 · answer #3 · answered by AmyWest 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you're worried about it, setup a RAID 1 arrangement with two of the drives. Most motherboards support this these days. Be warned that RAID only protects you against drive failure. Only a backup will save you from accidentally deleting something.
2006-12-21 11:23:46 · answer #4 · answered by Neebler 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
not at all. hard drive capacity has no effect on failure rates. the size will effect the seek time. if you are looking for optimum performance when running apps I would use a 250 GB hard drive for program files and keep all your data files on other hard drives.
using the same drive for applications and storage will significantly increase the seek time. doesn't matter if it's partitioned or not
2006-12-21 11:19:55 · answer #5 · answered by lv_consultant 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
properly, i'm the subsequent guy, and that i accept as true with you. Makes no longer one WHIT of distinction... no be counted what everybody right here has been saying (different than possibly Auggie). heavily. Six of one is a nil.5 dozen of the different. Whichever one is maximum inexpensive on the 2nd, and has the wonderful specs, is the only to get. that's 32 years of adventure talking. i've got put in extra of the two in my profession than i can even undergo in ideas; and function been doing it longer than maximum folk right here have even been alive (different than possibly, i will guess, Auggie)... ...and, believe me (and him): It makes no distinction. None. don't be misled by ability of insensible type loyalty which isn't according to one single element extra suitable than a trifling gut feeling... this is strictly that on which the different comments herein are based. wish that helps.
2016-12-11 13:55:50 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i have 750 seagate sata
300gb ata runs faster than the sata
when i click start it will crash on the 750gb
(no virus...)
2006-12-24 04:26:10 · answer #7 · answered by hpshuttlexpc 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋