Q2 2026 Backblaze Drive Stats: Hard Drive Failure Rates

2026年第二季度 Backblaze 硬盘统计报告：硬盘故障率

Running a storage cloud means serving as both builder and building inspector. You choose the materials, put them to work at scale, and return quarter after quarter to see how the structure is holding up. After 13+ years of publishing Drive Stats, we know the materials in this particular house pretty well.

运营一个存储云意味着既要担任建筑师，也要担任建筑检查员。你需要选择材料，将其大规模投入使用，并逐季度进行回访，以观察结构的稳固程度。在发布“硬盘统计”（Drive Stats）报告 13 年多之后，我们对这座“房子”里的材料已经相当了解。

So, when our preferred home improvement store introduces a new and improved brick (so to speak) we want to understand how it fits into the build. That question is becoming more relevant as higher-capacity drives become more (dare we say) load bearing. We’ve already been tracking the performance of drives at 20TB and above as a group; later in this installment of Drive Stats, we’ll talk about some of the differences between our current building blocks (CMR HDDs) and the new bricks.

因此，当我们的首选“建材商店”推出一种（姑且称之为）更新更好的砖块时，我们希望了解它如何融入到我们的建筑中。随着大容量硬盘变得越来越“承重”（如果可以这么说的话），这个问题变得愈发重要。我们已经开始将 20TB 及以上的硬盘作为一个群体进行性能跟踪；在本期报告的后续部分，我们将讨论目前的“建筑模块”（CMR 机械硬盘）与这些新“砖块”之间的一些差异。

But first, to take this extended pun to its inevitable conclusion, the inspection (a.k.a. The Stats). This Q2 2026 Drive Stats report begins with the latest walkthrough: the quarter’s annualized failure rates, the models that stood out, and the lifetime record of the fleet. Then, we’ll look at some of the emerging technologies that could shape the next phase of construction.

但首先，为了给这个冗长的双关语画上句号，让我们进入检查环节（即：统计数据）。这份 2026 年第二季度硬盘统计报告首先进行了一次全面巡检：包括本季度的年度故障率、表现突出的型号以及整个硬盘群的生命周期记录。随后，我们将探讨一些可能塑造下一阶段“施工”的新兴技术。

Drive Stats: The digest version Q2 2026 Hard drive failure rates

硬盘统计：2026 年第二季度硬盘故障率摘要

Throughout Q2 2026, Backblaze monitored 359,101 drives used to store data. For our evaluation, we removed from consideration 3,881 boot drives and 705 hard drives, as they did not meet the criteria to be included. We’ll discuss the criteria we used in the next section of this report. Removing these drives leaves us with 354,415 hard drives to analyze. The table below shows the annualized failure rates for Q1 2026 for this collection of drives.

在 2026 年第二季度，Backblaze 监控了 359,101 块用于存储数据的硬盘。在评估过程中，我们剔除了 3,881 块引导盘和 705 块不符合纳入标准的硬盘。我们将在本报告的下一部分讨论所使用的标准。剔除这些硬盘后，我们剩下 354,415 块硬盘可供分析。下表显示了这批硬盘在 2026 年第二季度的年度故障率。

(Note: Due to the length of the table, please refer to the original report for the full data breakdown.) （注：由于表格篇幅较长，完整数据明细请参考原报告。）

Note and observations

备注与观察

The quarterly AFR is 1.73%, the highest it’s been in quite a while. We’ll talk about the reasons why in just a bit, but for now, here’s your quarter-over-quarter tracking of the failure rate.

本季度的年度故障率（AFR）为 1.73%，是相当长一段时间以来的最高值。我们稍后会讨论其原因，但首先，以下是各季度故障率的对比跟踪。

As usual, let’s round up the honor roll. These drives had zero failures:

Seagate ST8000NM000A (8TB)
Seagate ST12000NM000J (12TB)
Seagate ST14000NM000J (14TB) And these drives had one:
Seagate ST16000NM000J (16TB) No typos here, folks: that’s a clean sweep by Seagate.

像往常一样，让我们列出“荣誉榜”。以下硬盘实现了零故障：

Seagate ST8000NM000A (8TB)
Seagate ST12000NM000J (12TB)
Seagate ST14000NM000J (14TB) 以下硬盘仅出现一次故障：
Seagate ST16000NM000J (16TB) 各位，这里没有笔误：希捷（Seagate）实现了大获全胜。

Out with the old. This quarter, we’ve seen two drives fully retire, the 4TB HGST HMS5C4040BLE640 at nearly nine years old total; and, the 8TB HGST HUH728080ALE600 at nearly eight years old. But where is the new? Just like last quarter, we have no new drive models—a curiosity, especially to have that happen two quarters in a row.

辞旧迎新。本季度，我们看到两款硬盘完全退役：总服役期近九年的 4TB HGST HMS5C4040BLE640，以及服役近八年的 8TB HGST HUH728080ALE600。但新硬盘在哪里呢？和上季度一样，我们没有引入新的硬盘型号——这很令人好奇，尤其是连续两个季度出现这种情况。

But, also like last quarter, that doesn’t mean no new deployments. While most drive models’ counts stayed more or less the same (plus or minus replacements), we once again see deployment concentrated in the 20TB+ drives.

不过，也和上季度一样，这并不意味着没有新的部署。虽然大多数硬盘型号的数量基本保持不变（仅有少量更换），但我们再次看到部署集中在 20TB 以上的硬盘上。

What’s going on with the high-end outliers?

高端异常值是怎么回事？

This quarter we had three outliers, which, according to a quartile analysis, defines an outlier as an AFR above 6.95%. Those drives are:

HGST HUH721212ALN604 (12TB)—7.63%
Seagate ST10000NM0086 (10TB)—9.33%
Seagate ST14000NM0138 (14TB)—8.26%

本季度我们出现了三个异常值。根据四分位数分析，异常值定义为 AFR 高于 6.95% 的型号。这些硬盘包括：

HGST HUH721212ALN604 (12TB) — 7.63%
Seagate ST10000NM0086 (10TB) — 9.33%
Seagate ST14000NM0138 (14TB) — 8.26%

Each of these drives have some pretty clear reasons for high failure rates. The HGST drive is nearly seven years old, and the 10TB Seagate was nearly 8.5 years old. Meanwhile, both the Seagate drives have a pretty low drive count—the 10TB drive only has 965; whereas the 14TB has 1,235. That means that while they only had 22 and 25 failures (respectively) their AFRs were quite high.

这些硬盘出现高故障率的原因都很明确。那款 HGST 硬盘已服役近七年，而 10TB 的希捷硬盘已服役近 8.5 年。同时，两款希捷硬盘的样本数量都相当少——10TB 型号仅有 965 块，而 14TB 型号有 1,235 块。这意味着尽管它们分别仅有 22 次和 25 次故障，但其 AFR 却非常高。

It’s worth noting there were a total of seven drives that still had an AFR of >3.0%. While we’ve just determined those aren’t outliers, that’s still quite a few high AFRs compared to other quarters—that means that 10 out 31 drives had an AFR higher than 3.0%.

值得注意的是，总共有七款硬盘的 AFR 超过了 3.0%。虽然我们刚才确定它们不属于异常值，但与其他季度相比，这仍然是相当多的高 AFR 记录——这意味着 31 款硬盘中有 10 款的 AFR 高于 3.0%。

I haven’t done a full analysis of how rare it is to have our distribution of >3.0% skew that high, but a casual look at the last few quarters show it to be skewed towards the higher end of the spectrum. That will, of course, bring up our average. Something to keep an eye on as we move forward.

我还没有对这种 >3.0% 的分布偏高现象的罕见程度进行全面分析，但粗略观察过去几个季度，数据确实向高位倾斜。这当然会拉高我们的平均值。这是我们在未来需要密切关注的问题。