Seagate Ultra Touch SSD, 1TB, Portable External SSD, 2.5", USB 3.0, PC & Mac, White, 4 months Adobe Creative Cloud Photography Plan (STJW1000401)

I ordered this Hard Drive and within 20 days it stopped working. Complete waste of money and unreliable. Even when I first opened the packaging it seemed like it was previously opened.

When I installed the unit it gave reading of only 14 TB

Cette référence n'existe plus depuis longtemps chez Seagate.Amazon vend sous cette appellation un autre disque, à la vitesse réduite et à la mémoire cache famélique.C'est une escroquerie !Ne surtout pas commander ce disque.Il ne s'agit pas d'un disque à 7200tr/min et 256Mo de cache, mais d'un disque à 5900tr/min avec 64Mo de cache.Par contre le prix de vente est bien celui du haut de gamme !

Pleased with my purchase so far. set it up as a single disk in my nas for now, was noticeably louder when formatting but seems to have settled down. Space is being reported at 9.10TB.The drive has onboard software that reports bytes read and written and extra stats which I havent looked into. My QNAP 451+ can read this data.When my older drives die eventually I will replace them all with this, highly recommended.UPDATE: after ordering I have noticed that is quite a bit more noisy than the WD hard drive it replaced. Not a big deal just means I have to close the door where my NAS is located.UPDATE 2: the drive has started to rattle. It claims it's healthy. Not sure out the drive long term. Dropped another star.UPDATE 3:6 months in. no issues.:)

I'll start by saying that I've not had much luck with Seagate drives in the past. I tend to stick to Western Digital as I'm yet to see one fail, and I've had bad experiences with Seagate, Toshiba et al. However I needed 4 drives for a NAS and I didn't have much choice. WD red drives now use SMR technology, which is a modern means of magnetically writing the data to the disc. It makes manufacturing cheaper at the expense of performance. Significantly so in fact, to the point where avoiding SMR drives is actively encouraged unless you're archiving data.The Seagate IronWolf drives use the more conventional 'CMR' technology. So with some trepidation I bought 4 of them over the WD Red which ordinarily would have been my first choice.I installed them in a Synology DS418 4-bay NAS enclosure, configured using Synology hybrid raid with a single drive fault tolerance giving me just under 12 terabytes of available storage. The drives have been installed for a few days and so far have performed flawlessly, allowing the Synology to reach gigabit transfer speeds. I will edit the review if they fail within an unexpected timeframe, but so far they are running quietly with very little heat and vibration, and all passed the Synology drive tests. Very pleased.

Wie auf den Bilder zu sehen ist schafft die Platte nicht mal ansatzweise die angegebenen 180 sondern gerade mal 125.. Mal eben 30% langsamer als angegeben..Und falls jetzt jemand meint es liegt am Rechner / sata Port für die habe ich das 2. Bild beigefügt von einer ssd am gleichen Port.Habe noch ein 3. Bild zugefügt dies zeigt die 6TB Variante der Seagate an dem gleichen Port.

So, you decided to buy the Seagate IronWolf, sure the name sounds cool. But you're not here for the name, you are here for the Product and let me tell you this. If you plan to use this as an Internal HDD then please move on, if you plan to use this product as intended (NAS) then carry on.Seagate IronWolf is dare I say a Consumer Grade HDD designed for NAS/Surveillance. I say Surveillance because I feel there is little difference between the Seagate IronWolf and Seagate SkyHawk, not to mention IronWolf is listed as “Surveillance HDD” under Seagate Warranty lookup tool.Now that isn’t a bad thing, as both serve few vital functions. These functions being:Store large chunks of Data;Function around the clock 24/7/365;I’m sure at this point someone is wondering why I said it’s not good for a “Internal HDD” in a Home/Small Office computer. And the reasons for this is quite simple:Most home/office PC’s only really need 500 ~ 1000GB as rest is usually stored on offsite backup (applies to: office use only or savvy home user);NAS aren’t designed to work as a single unit;Now the primary point is #2, that NAS work in a Cluster (RAID) to replicate data across the Cluster of HDD’s in that RAID. In home settings you do not have a RAID and as such using 1 NAS drive as an Internal is rather silly, as it’s not the intended purpose of a NAS.The other problem is that the IronWolf (Non-Pro, anything from 1 to 4 TB) will be running at 5900 RPM, this isn’t fast by any means as most consumer grade HDD’s like Compute or Baracudda run at 7200 RPM’s and come with a similar price tag as IronWolf minus the cool name. If you want the 7200 RPM speeds, you would need the IronWolf Pro and this is the point where the price starts to climb pretty fast vs consumer alternatives.The other problem I personally ran is that the IronWolf isn’t very MacOS friendly, and no this isn’t a problem with Driver support since my MacOS system runs fine with NTFS 2.5, 3.5 and SSD/M2 external drives. However, when it comes to IronWolf its locked in Read-Only mode, this only applies when connecting the IronWolf via SATA to USB adaptor with power and hooking it up to a USB port on the computer.Now then I hope this review was informative, and “NO” this isn’t a good choice to use as a PS4 hard drive either, for Gaming an SSD is a much better option, alternatively a Consumer grade HDD with a Flash portion would be more beneficial (assuming it’s 7200 RPM).Cheers.