I looked up both on desktech.com:

  1. ST8000AS0002
  2. ST8000NM0105

The price may change over time, but they currently appear to be basically identical.

The only metric that could be better is the power consumption, but it's a tiny amount in absolute terms (7.5W vs "<10").

  • Cache MB: 128 vs 256
  • MTBF: 800K vs 2M
  • TB/Year: 180 vs 550
  • Nonrecoverable Read Errors per Bits Read: 1 per 10e14 vs 1 sector per 10E15

What's the advantage of the "Archive" drive if it has a worse Nonrecoverable Read Errors per Bits Read and a worse MTBF rating?

  • Just a note, I always buy disks with 5-year warranties when I'm buying high capacity storage. I would also avoid SMR if possible. Mar 4, 2021 at 23:30

1 Answer 1


Here are spec sheet PDFs from Seagate:

Exos is a clear winner IMO. There are more important differences than you have listed:

  • Archive HDD uses the SMR technology (vs CMR in Exos), which makes it cheaper to manufacture but significantly decreases performance under certain workloads.
  • Archive has shorter warranty: 3 years vs. Exos with 5 years.
  • Max R/W speeds: 190 MB/s vs. 250 MB/s
  • I can't see rotational speed specified anywhere in the Archive HDD datasheet - it could be 5400 rpm vs. 7200 rpm of Exos

Archive HDD wins if you want to use it at near-freezing temperatures: Exos's specified min. temp is 5°.

  • 1
    Archive HDD RPM is listed as 5900 on Amazon. Mar 4, 2021 at 23:56

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .