• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by [ETA]MrSpadge

  1. Doesn't the Red have vibration sensors and compensation, which the Green doesn't have? MrS
  2. To be fair: the small NAS drives add vibration compensation, which the regular Green and Desktop HDD don't have. Depending on how many drives you have this might make a difference. @JJ Johnson: nice catch, I hadn't heard about Seagates 5 TB using 1.25 TB platters! However, the data is - as always - somewhat inconsistent: weight, idle power draw and noise of the 5 TB don't increase over the 4 TB, hinting at the same number of platters. But the sustained transfer speed doesn't increase either, which would be really strange for a 25% density boost, unless they only decreased the track spacing but not the distance between bits (this would be unprecedented). The data sheet also lists 6 heads and 3 platters for the 2 TB model, implying 667 GB platters (which they actually used in the past), yet claims the same performance as the 3 TB unit which definitely uses 1 TB platters. The most likely explanation would be that it's just the performance numbers which are off in both cases. MrS
  3. Yes, these are the first drives with 1.2 TB platters. Although the Samsung 2.5" 2 TB with 3 666 GB platters should exceed this density slightly. MrS
  4. If it's "just" the firmware I really think the performace tuning should be a user-setting, with presets "NAS" etc. Or even better yet: the drive should detect the kind of accesses demanded and adapt to it. Maybe with a user setting for maximum performance or power saving (which would pretty much be the already available acoustic mode setting). MrS
  5. [ETA]MrSpadge

    Samsung SSD 850 PRO Review Discussion

    I suppose it's "just the 40 nm process" with its lower write and erase times, in addition to their excellent controller and firmware. The SSDs back then didn't perform as well because they didn't have the latter, whereas the former makes the job of the controller much easier. A really impressive technology showcase! It will be very interesting what 3D NAND can do with PCIe interfaces and TLC. And at some day maybe even with attractive prices. MrS
  6. If you're buying anyway for a NAS you could just as well move up to 4 TB (a NAS can never be big enough). I'd use the Seagate 5.9k rpm drives, as the speed will mostly be limiited by the network anyway. MrS
  7. [ETA]MrSpadge

    What SSD to choose for gaming

    At the current prices the Crucial MX100 is a default win for every scenario besides servers and people whos income relies on extremely fast storage. Even the 240 GB model should fit your budget. And if you compare its performance to other 120 GB drives then it's very competitiive or even superior (depending on the alternative, of course). MrS
  8. "170 MiB/s (5TB), 150 MiB/s (4TB, 3TB), 140 MiB/s (2TB)" Let's guess platter densities: 5 TB: 5 x 1 TB 4 TB: 5 x 800 GB 3 TB: 4 x 800 GB (short stroked a biit or a little smaller) 2 TB: 3 x 667 GB Looks like 1 TB platters are stiill more expensive than lower densiity ones. MrS
  9. At least 2 years, probably a bit more. And they're obviously running into physical limitations, otherwise they would have choosen easier ways than 6 platters and 7 platters with Helium. In the mobile space there's at least the 2 TB Spinpoint with 667 GB 2.5" platters, which could be used for ~1.3 TB platters at 3.5" at 5k rpm. Seagate hinted at needing heat assisted magnetic recording for 8 and 10 TB drives, which adds a whole new layer of complexity. Not impossible, but cost per drive is certainly going up. MrS
  10. Screw it.. 2 screws are surely enough to hold that drive MrS
  11. Just a side note, which also applies to your other reviews: I suggest to limit the number of digits a bit more. For example quoting 4k random IOps as 19,890.27 doesn't provide any more information than 19,890, but doesn't look as clean and simple to read. I also highly doubt the last 0.27 IOps are statistically relevant, as in "if you repeat this test or use another drive, will that measurement result be the same?". I suppose your numbers hold up to the 3rd or 4th digit. If this is true, supplying anything further implies a false sense of precision. MrS
  12. Both The others are staying at 500 GB/platter. They have 7 mm design with 2 platters (instead of the usual 1), so they should be able to extend this to 9.5 mm and 3 platters, but have not yet choosen to do so. MrS
  13. Ouch - my bad! I searched the entire page but missed the "SPECS" at the top. My sincere apologies to Seagate. MrS
  14. I hate how they spend hours to tell what can be done with this new drive, yet even on the homepage under "What’s In the Hard Drive?" they don't provide a single detail except the 7.2k rpm spindle speed. Anyway, "25% faster than HGST" probably means STR, which means at least 1 TB platters (compared to 800 GB in the He6). The picture also shows 6 platters, but you never know if this is actually a picture of this drive. Anyway, competition and innovation are certainly welcome in the long-stagnated HDD market. And it seems like HGST needs to update their He drive with at least 1 TB platters! With a premium technology you have to leading, otherwise the cheaper and simpler solution wins. MrS
  15. [ETA]MrSpadge

    Hardisk disk check result

    An easy way to check the SMART status from Win is using the freeware Crystal Disk Info. And if you have to reinstall anyway you might want to consider an up grade to Win 8.1 - it even makes better use of older hardware. With a laptop getting proper drivers may not be easy, though. MrS
  16. [ETA]MrSpadge

    LaCie 6TB drives

    Nice, indeed! At 60 mm width it's certainly a single drive. All drives are stated to run at 7.2k rpm. The STR numbers show the 4 TB unit using 5 x 800 GB platters, whereas the 5 TB one uses 5 x 1 TB platters. What about the 6 TB model? If it was the Hitachi He it would probably be more expensive. MrS
  17. He is surprisingly expensive for a gas.. but we're still talking about less than 10€/l of liquid He. That's an enormous gas volume, and you don't have to fill that much volume per drive. Just consider those He-filled balloons - they're not that expensive. And when talking about HDD pricing (and comparing to flash) you always have to keep in mind that these do not neccessarily reflect real production costs. Especially once you put an "Enterprise" sticker on anything it magically costs 2 or 3 times as much. Before the flood my company was able to buy standard 1-platter 500 GB drives for 17€. That included some massive discount, but the manufacturer and the OEM we were purchasing from still made some money on that deal (otherwise they would not have offered it). And adding a few platters doesn't make an HDD all that much more expensive. Bottom line: when you're paying a few 100€ for some high capacity enterprise drive you're not really paying for the manufacturing, but rather for "what the product can do for you". There's plenty of room at the bottom for HDD pricing, altough actually offering those prices for everyone would leave them without any profit margin to put towards research & development. Hence they won't unless they'd be forced to do so by some competing technology. MrS
  18. It will be interesting to see how they can scale this technology. Using whatever technology the M9T uses should be good for ~1.33 TB per platter at 5.4k rpm in the 3.5" form factor. With 7 of these platters we'd already be at 10 TB! MrS
  19. Looks really nice - I'd buy one if I needed one! MrS
  20. [ETA]MrSpadge

    Which hard drive for 24/7 use?

    Without a backup you are "tempting" your family to put all their valuable data onto a single HDD, which can fail at any time. You didn't say anything about backup, so you may have some.. but if not, this is a dangerous plan. They'll get really mad at you if that drive fails! MrS
  21. It sounds like you expect to need 1 TB of storage. But since you brought up the Seagate Hybrid drive it seems like your hot data pool would be rather small. If this is true you might be best served by an affordable SSD (128 - 256 GB) for the OS's (maybe with data deduplication?) and some HDD for storing the cold data. If your hot data is more like 1 TB in size don't punish yourself with anything less than the raptor. But in this case even this fine drive could be overwhelmed - depending on the actual load this system is going to face. MrS
  22. [ETA]MrSpadge

    Seagate Enterprise Turbo SSHD Review Discussion

    Nice drive, nice review! Side note: in Sysbench you seem to have Raid00 and Raid10 mixed up in the graphs. MrS
  23. That's a quick response, very informative and quite a neat trick Probably using the electrical spindle motor as generator to get enough power to flush the cache into non-volatile memory, which is probably flash for simplicity (this shouldn't be needed very often, so write cycles wouldn't be an issue). The NV memory would at most have to be as large as the DRAM cache, probably less. MrS
  24. Thanks! German ZDNet says they're 5x1 TB platter, with maximum transfer rate of 205 MB/s. No further details on persistent cache, though. MrS
  25. [ETA]MrSpadge

    WD1003FZEX slow access times warning!

    Spindle speed does jeopardize performance and reliability due to excessive vibration - unless you counteract it appropriately. That's why RAID edition, NAS and enterprise drives have special vibration compensation built in. If you don't need to do this due to lower spindle speeds you can offer cheaper drives. And we seem to have a different opinion about how cold cold data actually is. For me this is infrequently accessed data - otherwise it wouldn't be cold. It's the last randomly accessible storage tier, right before flushing to tape (if available). This could be archives, backups, unimportant media files or whatever. So why care about the performance of things you almost never need? A quick google pretty much reinforces my point. They're even saying shingled magnetic recording disks are ideal for this task! Of course in pure 512/4k random access no HDD could saturate USB 2. But why would you access your cold data like this? If this ever happens you're extremely unlucky or you've put your data into the wrong storage tier. It should at least have been on SSDs, as even 15k HDDs are far too slow for such cases. What does "mutually exclusive" mean if not "if I want to increase one of them, the other one has to go down"? Areal density is the same as density per platter (what I refer to as platter density, not the number of platters) as long as we're talking about the same physical HDD size (3.5"). And it obviously depends on recording technology - for any spindle speed. Honestly I don't know why you're bringing up the Raptor here. It just reinforces my point: despite running at 10k rpm it "only" achieves as much sequential throughput as a current 7.2k rpm Seagate. That means its linear data density must be ~30% lower. And they're not doing this just for fun, it's simply because at higher rpms you can not reach the same density (for a given recording / head technology). Actually, there's also the factor of disk diameter, which gives the 3.5" drive an advantage of approximately a factor of 1.4 over the 2.5" Raptor. Factoring this in both drives would be about tied for areal density. But note that with lower diameter platters vibration (again!) is reduced, which makes it easier to achieve higher platter densities. Which is why the Raptor transitioned to 2.5" in the first place. After my previous comments it's probably no surprise that my simple answer would be: because different markets are better suited for different spindle speeds, and sometimes other features (like that vibration compensation). However, there's something I really don't like: separate product lines for drives which only differ in firmware. Not sure how common this really is, as they could be subtile hardware differences. But there are 5.4/5.9k rpm HDDs being sold specifically for digital recording. I can not imagine any hardware modification neccessary for this, hence they should just make the firmware tuning for these apps user selectable and kill off that product line completely. MrS