ST16000NM002G. Assuming the machine has the capability to run both SATA and SAS. All the articles I seem to read appear to be wrong (outdated). There's a lot that state one drive prioritizes speed, while the other capacity. One has better reliability than the other, etc. While this info may have been true in the past, it seems to be wrong now. Here is Seagate's datasheet Opens a new window on the two drives. ST16000NM001G is on the X16 platform (the highest capacity on X16). It has 9 disks with 18 heads, each disk about 1.8TB.

Current pricing makes the Exos X series more attractive in performance-focused deployments, but you do lose some consumer/prosumer features like two years of free data recovery found on the IronWolf Pro, and advanced disk health monitoring found on both IronWolf and IronWolf Pro series. Seagate has two standard drives that are 16Tb. One is X16 series, while the other is X18. The data sheet on the X18 says it is CMR, but the data sheet for the X16 does not. TrueNAS Scale for beginners: https://www.truenas.com/community/resources/welcome-to-truenas-scale-beginners-intro.208/ Power supplies: https://www.truenas.com/community/resources/proper-power-supply-sizing-guidance.39/ FWIW, I also have 8 Exos 16TB drives in my NAS, and it's been in service (as my home NAS) since early 2020, with no drive failures (they're currently hanging off an LSI 9211-8i SAS HBA flashed with P20 IT firmware).lapetinap​ That is why I am asking this question. There is nothing I can find that states SATA or SAS for these two drives has any reliability or speed advantage over the other. Maak een einde aan de kosten en complexiteit van het opslaan, verplaatsen en activeren van gegevens op schaal. The 1TB to 4TB IronWolf models use 5,900-RPM platter rotation, but the 6TB and larger capacities shifted to 7,200 RPMs just like all capacities of the IronWolf Pros series. The IronWolf base model competes head to head with Western Digital's Red (base series) that still uses the 5,900-RPM spindle speed. The IronWolf Pro is the direct competitor to the Red Pro series with 7,200-RPM speed. The advantage becomes very clear in the user experience and performance.

BigPool: 8 * Seagate Exos 12TB HDD in 4 * mirrored pairs + 2 18TB Toshiba MG08 + Optane 900P as SLOG + Mirrored Special (800GB Intel DC S3610)We start to see significant performance variation in the random workloads. The first thing you will clearly notice is the Exos walking away from the two IronWolf models and in some workloads double and tripling random read performance. Less obvious is the IronWolf outperforming the IronWolf Pro. For many, this is unexpected, but we've noticed the IronWolf performing better in some workloads over the years with other capacities. Random 4KB mixed workloads, and the 70% read test, give us a good indication of virtualized desktops running off-network storage. This, as well as database and miscellaneous cloud storage, are where the Exos X stands tall. The two IronWolf products still perform well for their respected markets. Most IronWolf drives simply fall into mass storage roles hold cold data for end-users be them consumers, creators, or businesses. Server Workloads Is it because your search was too limited? Do you want to compare with a Seagate Nytro 3031- Series - 1DWPD 3331 Scaled Endurance 7.68TB, SAS (XS7680SE70004) I'm starting to see the differences now! Thanks for the help. It looks like my controller, H740P Opens a new window will always communicate via 2x SAS connectors. The spec sheet says each port has a connection of "Up to 12Gbp/s per port", but I can see on a lesser RAID card how difference in the SATA vs SAS drives would make a bigger issue. ZIL and SLOG: https://www.truenas.com/community/threads/some-insights-into-slog-zil-with-zfs-on-freenas.13633/

Burn-in and testing: https://www.truenas.com/community/threads/building-burn-in-and-testing-your-freenas-system.17750/Be cautious when looking at raw specs. An "interface" has to take into account both ends of the cable. In the NAS, we use eight drives from each series in a RAID 6 array without a SSD cache. The QSAN XN8012R uses the ZFS file system and a 10-gigabit Ethernet connection to the network.