Toshiba N300 vs Seagate IronWolf and IronWolf Pro at 8 to 16TB

Toshiba N300 vs IronWolf: what each maker's numbers measure

The N300 figures here come from the N300 NAS hard drives datasheet dated 04/2026, published by Toshiba Electronics Europe. The IronWolf figures come from Seagate's DS1904.23 sheet and the IronWolf Pro figures from DS2129.4. The two makers lay out their sheets differently, and four rows need a warning before you set them side by side.

• Noise: Toshiba prints acoustics in idle mode as dB typical. Seagate prints dBA, typical, with idle measured in its Idle 1 state, and adds a seek figure. We have not found a Toshiba document stating that its figure is A-weighted, so this page prints both figures with their own units and does not rank one maker's noise figure against the other's.
• Idle power: Toshiba gives consumption in active idle; Seagate gives an idle power average. The labels differ and we do not know that the test states match.
• Transfer: Toshiba gives a typical sustained rate; Seagate gives a maximum sustained rate at the outer diameter.
• Reliability: Toshiba rates MTTF; Seagate rates MTBF. Both are hours across a population, not a promise about one drive.

Toshiba N300 vs Seagate IronWolf at 12TB

At 12TB the two drives are rated alike for the job: the same 180TB/year workload, the same 3-year limited warranty, CMR on both and eight bays on both. The differences are in the drive itself. The N300's sheet gives it twice the buffer, a higher transfer figure on a differently labelled row, and lower power figures at both idle and operating, again with the label caveat above. On noise the sheets print 20 dB typical and 28 dBA, two different units that we leave side by side.

IronWolf Pro at 12TB, ST12000NT001, is printed at 20 dBA idle, 26 dBA seek and 5.0 W idle average. Those are on Seagate's own unit, so against the standard IronWolf 12TB they are a like-for-like reading: 8 dBA lower at idle and 4 dBA lower at seek. If quiet running at 12TB matters, the Pro is the Seagate drive to weigh against the N300, whose sheet uses dB typical.

Toshiba N300 vs IronWolf and IronWolf Pro at 16TB

At 16TB the power picture is split. The N300 has the lower idle figure, 4.14 W against 5.1 W, but IronWolf has the lower operating figure, 7.3 W against 7.48 W, on rows the two makers label differently. IronWolf's sheet also gives 240 MB/s maximum sustained and 256MB of cache at this size.

IronWolf Pro 16TB is ST16000NT001, on the table of DS2129.4 that covers 16 to 24TB. Seagate prints it at 20 dBA idle, 26 dBA seek, 5.0 W idle average and 270 MB/s maximum sustained, and that table lists a 550TB/year workload rate limit, a 5-year limited warranty and 2,500,000 hours MTBF. The workload and warranty rows are what separate the Pro from both the N300 and the standard IronWolf, whose sheets list 180TB/year and 3 years at 12TB. If your question is Toshiba N300 vs IronWolf Pro, that is the answer the sheets give.

Toshiba N300 vs IronWolf at 8 and 10TB

At 8 and 10TB Toshiba prints 34 dB typical for the N300, against Seagate's 28 dBA for IronWolf at both sizes; as at 12TB, the units differ and we do not rank them. Power favours the N300 against ST8000VN004 on these labels, by about 2 W at idle and 1 W operating.

IronWolf also has ST8000VN002 at 8TB: 25 dBA idle, 4.0 W idle, 5.3 W average operating and 202 MB/s, so on power it sits below the N300 8TB's labelled figures. It is set beside the other 8TB IronWolf models on IronWolf vs IronWolf Pro. At 10TB, the N300 is retail number HDWG71AEZSTA with 1,000,000 hours MTTF, and IronWolf is ST10000VN000 with 28 dBA idle, 32 dBA seek, 7.8 W idle and 1,000,000 hours MTBF.

Toshiba N300 vs IronWolf for a home or small-office NAS

At 12TB both sheets list support for up to eight bays, so a typical home or small-office box does not decide between them. Choose by capacity first, because the power figures change with it, and treat the noise figures as each maker's own reading.

• At 12 and 16TB: the N300's sheet gives the lower idle power figure, and at 12TB twice the buffer. The standard IronWolf matches it on workload and warranty at 12TB.
• At 8TB: the N300's labelled power figures are below ST8000VN004's and above ST8000VN002's.
• For a heavier workload or a longer warranty: IronWolf Pro, at 550TB/year and 5 years on its 16 to 24TB table.

Check the part number on a listing against the tables above. Toshiba's sheet gives the N300 12TB both a retail number, HDWG51CEZSTA, and a bulk number, HDWG51CUZSVA, and gives the 16TB only a bulk number, HDWG51GUZSVA, with the retail column marked n/a. An Amazon.co.uk listing may carry either kind of number.

Toshiba N300, IronWolf and IronWolf Pro prices on Amazon.co.uk

Each line has its own table of new listings, lowest pounds per TB inc VAT first. The N300 table leaves out titles containing Pro. Compare rows of the same capacity across the tables: that is where a premium for one maker or tier shows, not at the top of each table.

The IronWolf Pro table holds 31 listings right now. Lowest price per TB there, any capacity: £33.21/TB. Each lowest figure is a level and may come from a different capacity, so we print no percentage between them.

The tables can hold capacities this page has no figures for, such as an N300 at 14 or 18TB. For those rows this page gives price and listing data only. The Recording column prints a technology only where a document ties it to the row's part number.

More N300 and IronWolf comparisons

For the N300 range on its own, see Toshiba N300. The same drive against WD's NAS line is on Toshiba N300 vs WD Red Plus, and against Toshiba's desktop line on Toshiba N300 vs X300.