My impression is the differences are small and not enough to directly affect price. The NAS drives don't come in smaller sizes nor do they have the power saving functionality, which is a bad thing in any RAID config. They advertise the anti-vibration feature which the Deskstars do not. They also advertise an 1M hour MTBF. I suspect the NAS drive are slightly higher quality, but it may be no more than firmware. They are clearly targeted at a slightly more discerning audience.
More to the point, unless you want the power saving functionality, there is no reason NOT to buy the NAS version.
cheers,
tod
On Sep 9, 2015, at 11:15 PM, John Moore bigfish@pacbell.net [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:I've done some googling but haven't found a definitive answer of which is better the Hitachi Deskstar or the Deskstar NAS 4TB drive. I was surprised to see the NAS version alongside the regular deskstars at Fry's and the NAS was about 10 bucks cheaper. I would have thought the moniker NAS would mean a better drive but that's just my consumer instinct and not scientific.I found one thread that said the NAS probably has a shorter error correction timeout to make it more suitable for raid use and that for desktop use the regular deskstar was probably better. Anybody have a suggestion?Here's the thread I found:hat are the differences between HGST Deskstar and Deskstar NAS 4TB mo
- You cannot start a new topic
- Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic#1
ekotan
Member- Member
- 5 posts
Posted 19 March 2014 - 09:41 PMAre there any differences between HGST's Deskstar (HDS724040ALE640) and Deskstar NAS (HDN724040ALE640) 4TB models? According to Hitachi's data sheets, they both feature 7200 RPM spin speed, 64 MB cache and a SATA-III interface. Pricing is also similar. The NAS model's data sheet also mentions rotational vibration sensor technology and 1 million hours of MTBF, so are they designed with a little more fault tolerance in mind?#2
Mod- Mod
- 3,692 posts
Posted 20 March 2014 - 02:05 PMThey are designed to handle additional vibration and other firmware optimizations for multi-drive storage sub-systems-- small RAID setups and whatnot.For desktop use you probably want the regular Deskstar, as the Deskstar NAS line almost certainly has a shorter error correction timeout optimized for RAID use, rather than a longer error correction period permitted for desktop drives.#3
Member- Member
- 5 posts
Posted 20 March 2014 - 04:45 PMThanks, I've got five of the Deskstar NAS models in an internal RAID-5 array on an Areca 1882 controller and five of the regular Deskstars in an external Drobo 5D RAID which is used for overnight incremental backups (so not in constant use). So far, all is working well; and I'll monitor the situation over time.#4
SR Admin- Admin
- 5,856 posts
Posted 21 March 2014 - 09:44 AMFYI, we just got a box of NAS drives from HGST, should start testing soon. Most of it will be done within NAS systems, but we'll run some single drive numbers for you too for comparison. Like has been said though, I'd stick with the Deskstars for your use.John Moore Barking Trout Productions Studio City, CA bigfish@pacbell.net
__._,_.___
Posted by: hoplist@hillmanncarr.com
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a New Topic | • | Messages in this topic (2) |
this is the Avid-L2
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment