10TB NAS hard-drive for Desktop PC

NAS or Enterprise drives can be better. They can have better vibration resistance and produce lower temps.

The biggest difference is they use TLER (Time limited error recovery). If the drive has a bad sector it will hammer on it trying to retrieve data before remapping the sector. With TLER this time is limited to about 7 seconds. Which will handle most bad sectors. While a desktop drive may spend thirty seconds to a minute trying to recover the bad sector. For the most part if 7 seconds isn't enough time. More time won't make a difference. But in a few rare circumstances that extra time spent may actually recover that piece of data.

As long as you keep a backup this isn't an issue. If you don't keep a backup. A fool and his data will soon be parted.

As far as noise. Seagate seems to be the quietest for 10TB. They are even quieter than 8TB drives in active use.
https://us.hardware.info/reviews/6975/14/22-6-10tb-hard-drives-review-one-drive-a-lot-of-storage-noise-levels

As for 5 years of reliability. The helium drives are quite different than older lower capacity drives. So things may have changed. HGST (Hitachi) has been the most reliable in the past. Although looking at 8TB Seagates. It seems that Seagate has greatly improved their reliability. I guess those lawsuits and bad PR hurt them.
https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-benchmark-stats-2016/
https://www.hbsslaw.com/cases/seagate

As for personal preference. I would buy whichever is cheaper. It won't really make a difference in a non RAID scenario. Every manufacturer can have a bad line. As long as they correct the problem in future lines. I have eight Samsung drives right now. Four bought in 2009 (1TB), two in 2013 (4TB) and two in 2014 (5TB). All of them still function properly.

Although personal experience is not statistically relevant. In the past ten years I have had five or six WD hard drives fail. About 50% failure rates. I have had no Hitachi drives fail and I have had one Seagate fail. Although I think only one failure has ever been within the first three years. It was the Seagate in the first month or two and was replaced by Seagate. The only reason the WDs had such a high failure rate is they have many more years on them. My newest WD is 500GB most were 160GB to 320GB.