Just moved onto a single computer setup that only has a 128GB

>>58774940
kys

c:\windows\kys\

anyway hdd's are 20-25 bucks per TB just fucking buy one. since it's porn and not important you can just get a cheap used/refurb'd 2 or 3 tb on newegg.

Nobody cares

>>58775039
Show me where to find a non-surveillance hard drive for 25$ for 1tb of quality reliable speed on an HDD.

>>58774940
Stop saving that much porn, dickhead. Save the amateur shit and rare shit you find. Then create a list or use a program to save links for galleries, websites and videos for the ones you visit frequently. Find a method to save certain frames to remind you of the video you want with easy access to the link.

Saving 500gb of porn YEARLY is ridiculous. I don't even believe there's 500gb of good shit produced a year. All the good shit is already made. At this point you're hunting amateurs and the rare decent star that takes rise.

>>58775262
Dude, I have an empornium account. I've downloaded 300GB this month. A lot of it is 1080P JAVs or amateur shit like you said

>>58775262

>quality
>reliable
>speed

it's a HDD anon, and he's talking about watching video from it.

28-33 dollars per TB gets you new WD or Seagate.

https://edwardbetts.com/price_per_tb/internal_hdd/

>>58774940
Use a NAS. 8x6tb drives in RAID 6=36TB storage.

>>58775296
Yeah no. I found a hitachi for 50$ for 2tb. But Western digital and Seagate are 70$ new. I found a 2tb SATA 3 WD hard drive refurbished with a year warranty for 50$.

Just because a website puts a price on something doesn't mean that's what they sell for. As much as we all want cheap storage. 2tb of data is still upwards of 60-80$ for non performance storage. At the 300gb a month stage you should probably look into 4K. And a shitty refurbished 5400rpm for to video would be terrible.

File: cory.jpg (52KB, 598x511px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 598x511px

>not having an FTP server at home

why though

File: dafug.png (74KB, 300x256px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 300x256px

>>58775262
>surveillance hard drive

elaborate for anon?

>>58775370
>FTP
> not SFTP
kurose

>>58775385
WD reds are like 8TB for 80$ or something ridiculously cheap. But they're designed to hold thousands and thousands of small tint video clips at very low to average resolution. Most enterprise video recording software uses cheap motion detection to trigger on and off recording to save space instead of recording 24 hours a day worth of an empty parking lot.

Later on software just takes all of these tiny clips and pieces them together in ram based on search query. Every software works differently but this is what I've observed.

>>58775419

>8tb for 80

wat

>>58775412
Didn't distinguish since normal FTP shouldn't even be an option in 1008,5 * 2, sorry Anon.

>>58775450
No it's like 250. I definitely lied. But in all fairness I swear to God I recall seeing either an article or a product of 8TB for some ungodly cheap price.

Regardless, it doesn't affect the rest of what I said. Data isn't as cheap as 23~ per TB of quality storage. FHD/UHD movies are more resource intensive than people think. Lot of high flow reading from large files and a lot of decoding going on especially for thinks like Blu-ray players. People wonder why a good DVD player is only like 50$ and Blu-ray players for home theatre systems can be upwards of 300 just for the player.

File: scream.gif (929KB, 264x320px) Image search: [Google]

929KB, 264x320px

>>58775554
Dude so close.....

>>58775351
you still don't have to go apeshit for high performance "surveillance" or "server" rated storage drives

even 4k video plays just fine from 7200rpm HDDs

no one in their right mind would buy a refurbished drive unless they were broke and weren't storing anything important on it

>>58775554
>FHD/UHD movies are more resource intensive than people think
what sort of shittastic hard drives from the 90s are you still using? even 5400RPM drives have throughput that is higher than the bitrate of 4K video unless you have some fuckstupid encoded video with ridiculous bitrate

>>58775608
Nonono don't misunderstand. Server and surveillance drives are not good for his application. A 7200rpm drive is much more reasonable. Surveillance and server drives are meant to hold nibblets of files. Not large files. They're for redundancy and for software to later assemble into full size usable information. I'd be in hell of a company had for instance 80 server drives all with their own label instead of a well planned raid setup.

>>58775647
A torrent 1.2gb file is not 4k. Most 4K videos I've seen are in excess of 4.5gb. Not even usable by various system formats. 5400rpm drive is fine for some applications and definitely fine for 1080p. But for large movies and videophile applications. You'd be pretty stupid to get a 5400 rpm drive especially if you need to transfer or move files at any point. Enjoy sucking dick for 24 minutes waiting for a single movie to move two folders down.