What is the point of using 3.5" drives when 2.5" drives

>>47836032
Something about them being significantly more cost effective
>NiCe B9 m7

>>47836062
This is only a problem if you're a homeless person swiping at pennies on the sidewalk

Tree-fiddy is what South Park says though

>>47836032
Smaller drives usually have less RPM

File: micro-sd-card-raid-array.jpg (87KB, 750x600px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 750x600px

>>47836032

What is the point of using 2.5" drives when micro SD cards are smaller and literally the exact same thing?

All you're doing is taking up more space for no reason at all. If you use a 2.5" drive in this day and age, you're dumb

File: msata_sata500px[1].png (258KB, 500x366px) Image search: [Google]

258KB, 500x366px

>>47836032
Standardization, mostly.
Go look inside a 2.5" SSD, it's mostly empty inside.

They just make them that size so they can fit in a laptop or desktop drive bay with a spacer.

>>47836032
2.5 are slower and have lower capacities

it's not that hard

File: i just don't care anymore (bait series).png (35KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 625x626px

because what the hell else am i supposed to do with that 1" of space in my bays

ain't like i can fit another drive in there, they're only 3.5" wide

Performance is worse. 2.5" drives are usually slower and have laptop specific features that reduce performance but extend the lifespan of the drive from it being knocked around while on. Performance is roughly 60% of a proper 3.5in drive.

If you use a 2.5in drive in a desktop that isn't a ssd you're either a poorfag or moron.

Are you seriously fucking retarded or are you trolling

2.5" drives are slower, cost more for the same capacities, and aren't available in as high capacities.

If you don't mind any of those, just get microSD card instead for the smallest form factor.

>>47836070
If "price doesn't matter at all" and "2.5-inch drives are good enough" is your reasoning, why would you ever use a spinning drive? Stick to SSDs for the same or smaller form factors while still getting drives up to 1TB and at much higher speeds.

File: image.jpg (235KB, 2100x1750px) Image search: [Google]

235KB, 2100x1750px

What is the point of using micro SD cards when nano storage is smaller and literally the exact same thing?

All you're doing is taking up more space for no reason at all. If you use a micro SD card in this day and age, you're dumb

>>47836032
2.5" drives have half the IOP and 2/3 the sequential transfer speed of 3.5".
You need more sata ports for the same capacities. 3.5" is at 8TB for consumer drives while 2.5" is at 2TB. (don't shift goalposts saying nobody needs more than 2TB, your argument is that it's exactly the same thing)

>>47836192
SSDs aren't as reliable as mechanical drives though, and they become a brick when they crap out

>>47836674
>mechanical drives
>reliable
SSDs are more reliable, especially new ones with less shitty controllers.
And once something craps out, it craps out.

>>47836674
if an HDD dies there's nothing you can do for it, unless you happen to have a negative-pressure clean room in your house i guess

>>47836032
2.5" hard drives are much slower than your average 3.5" drive fool.

>>47836221
sorry.

>>47836703
I've owned 50+ HDDs and SSDs in the last 12 years. Not one has failed me. Am I just lucky?

>>47836032
>2.5" drives
>Not even 1.8" ZIF drives
do you even iPod

>>47836751
I knew a guy who used to transfer platters from broken drives to new ones by hand, charged a fuckload for it. Don't know how possible that'd be on a more modern one though.

>>47836896
I still have one from 1998, barely making any suspicious noise.
I guess it's luck. Not running a server might have had something to do with it.

>>47836095
I actually love that. I'd use the shit out of it.

>>47836703
more reliable in laptops maybe, but I dont think they average 4-5 years.