WD and Seagate new capacity points in the horizon

S

StorageJoe

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 14, 2005
Messages
460
On product roadmaps given to a few 2nd tier OEMS I've talked to in the past week, both Seagate and WD are showing new capacity points on the horizon.

WD is claiming to have a new series of their RE2 drive (rev level EX167) to be released in 2nd half '07 which will include a new 500 GB drive as well as a 640 GB drive. No mention of areal density or number of platters. Also no mention of perpendicular technology.

Seagate is also looking to release a 1TB version of their 7200.10 drive to the OEM market in Q2 '07, based on the same perpendicular technology as the rest of the 7200.10 line. They are also moving all fiber products to a 4gb host connection.

Hitachi has yet to announce to the channel, or the OEMs that I'm aware of at least, any increased capacity points, although they have hinted at a reworked 500GB SATA with a 3 platter design (mostlikely perpendicular).
 
StorageJoe said:
Actually, the dates listed are when they are releasing evals to these OEMs.
Click to expand...
so it would be likely that we won't see them until a bit after that?
 
I must be getting old when I still recall being amazed that a 1 GB drive was available to consumers and wondered how I'd ever fill something that huge. Now were approaching 1000x larger :(
 
tdg said:
I must be getting old when I still recall being amazed that a 1 GB drive was available to consumers and wondered how I'd ever fill something that huge. Now were approaching 1000x larger :(
Click to expand...
I remember that too and I am NOT OLD!
 
drizzt81 said:
I remember that too and I am NOT OLD!
Click to expand...

Maybe it's just I feel older when n00bs come around complaining about paying anything over 20 cents a GB, I'm still paying off debts from the hard drives I bought in the early 90's
:p
 
I came across this article that mentioned TB laptop HDDs are in the works. Kudos to Seagate and hopefully the increased capacity won't come at the cost of decreased reliability.

Make way for the terabyte laptop drive

New technology from Seagate could increase disk capacity 10 times

Chris Mello

July 05, 2006 (TechWorld.com) -- Seagate Technology Inc. plans to increase disk capacity by 10 times with new technology it has just patented, meaning a computer hard drive could soon be storing as much as a terabyte of data.

The Heat-Assisted Magnetic Recording (HAMR) technology created by Seagate includes nanotube-based lubrication to allow the read/write head of a disk to get closer to the surface and store more information.

The smaller the data-recording areas on a disk surface, the more of them that can be packed together, and subsequently the greater the capacity of the disk, Seagate said. But reading and writing ever-smaller bits means that the read/write head has to come closer to the disk surface, requiring a tough lubricant layer on the surface.

Storing data properly in extremely small areas requires the magnetic material to be heated during the writing phase, but this causes the lubricant film deposited on top of the magnetized recording layer to evaporate.

Seagate's patent resolves this problem by having a reservoir inside the disk casing that contains nanotube-based lubricant. Some of this is periodically pumped out as a vapor and deposited on the surface of the disk, replenishing the evaporated lubricant. The vapor deposition process is similar to that used in the production of CDs and DVDs.

Seagate anticipates that the new technology could increase disk capacity by a factor of 10, making possible a 600GB 1.8-in. drive, a 1.46TB 2.5-in. drive, and 7.5TB Barracuda 3.5-in. drive. The lubricant reservoirs will be built to last the life of the disk.

Seagate has not given a date by which the technology will appear in products.
 
If Hitachi can hold the line on seek performance with the T7K500, it will be the 7200RPM drive to beat performance wise. Three 166GB platters.

All of the T7K500 SATA drives will be available with a 16MB buffer (finally), which means that the 250 and 320GB units will be absolute monsters performance wise.
 
I still remember the sound of my Seagate ST-225 with an RLL controller! Wow! I got 50% more space than using the MFM controller.... 32MB!!!

Then we got a Perstor controller.... 80-90% over 20MB... we were rocking at 37MB and we can plug in TWO drives! Pushing 80MB !!!!

 
osalcido said:
you people talking about 1gb hard drives are old... face it :)
Click to expand...
My first computer (that my father bought) had a 20 MB (yes, mega, not giga) HDD. :eek:
 
$/GB is much more important, in general, than the highest GB. So a more interesting question for many large-space users isn't "when is the TB drive going to be available", but "when is 500 GB going to be the sweet spot?". Right now, 250-320 GB drives are in the "sweet spot", and it may be edging towards 400 GB. It's hard to imaging TB drives becoming the sweet spot for a very long time.

Of course, if you have to have 8 TB, and have only 1 controller / 8 slots, etc., then the TB drives are going to have value and sometimes you won't mind paying huge premiums for them, and similar reasoning applies to 500 / 750 GB drives sometimes.

Oh, my first HD was 10 MB, and it was awesome -- what an upgrade from dual floppies!
 
I just got a 500GB SATA2 drive. Havent put it thru it's paces yet (just installed it yesterday)

I do alot of video work so I need lots of room (need to keep projects for a few months in case customers complain or want a change)

 
Madwand said:
$/GB is much more important, in general, than the highest GB. So a more interesting question for many large-space users isn't "when is the TB drive going to be available", but "when is 500 GB going to be the sweet spot?". Right now, 250-320 GB drives are in the "sweet spot", and it may be edging towards 400 GB. It's hard to imaging TB drives becoming the sweet spot for a very long time.

Of course, if you have to have 8 TB, and have only 1 controller / 8 slots, etc., then the TB drives are going to have value and sometimes you won't mind paying huge premiums for them, and similar reasoning applies to 500 / 750 GB drives sometimes.

Oh, my first HD was 10 MB, and it was awesome -- what an upgrade from dual floppies!
Click to expand...
I agree that the price point (i.e. lowest $ per GB) is more important for most of us. But for some, price is no object. :eek:
 
Yeah,

They think that starting that completing a file copy or whatnot 2 to 3 seconds sooner is worth the extra $50 to $100 they'll pay for the "faster" drive.

It's like folks who pay an extra $100 for a video card that does 5 fps faster (80 vs 85 fps)

But this can be applied to everything, including life... trying to get 1-2 more HP from your car, overclocking your video/cpu...

So lets leave it there.

beowulf7 said:
I agree that the price point (i.e. lowest $ per GB) is more important for most of us. But for some, price is no object. :eek:
Click to expand...
 
beowulf7 said:
My first computer (that my father bought) had a 20 MB (yes, mega, not giga) HDD. :eek:
Click to expand...

what are you insinuating?
my first pc was 20 MB
and was only 16MHZ, went to 20 if i pushed the magic TURBO button!!!
hmmmm nitros injection straight into the cpu.... :p
 
Megalomaniac said:
what are you insinuating?
my first pc was 20 MB
and was only 16MHZ, went to 20 if i pushed the magic TURBO button!!!
hmmmm nitros injection straight into the cpu.... :p
Click to expand...
ah yes, the turbo button!
 
tdg said:
Maybe it's just I feel older when n00bs come around complaining about paying anything over 20 cents a GB, I'm still paying off debts from the hard drives I bought in the early 90's
:p
Click to expand...

I remeber that, i paid $500 canadian for a 40G HD about 7 years ago!!!!

this is why i get so annoyed with people who complain computer parts are SO expensive.

Not really, instead of spending $500 on an HD, you spend it on a vid card
Instead of spending $300 on 256mb of PC133 ram - you buy a fast cpu.

prices are the same - just they changed what cost more.
 
Megalomaniac said:
what are you insinuating?
my first pc was 20 MB
and was only 16MHZ, went to 20 if i pushed the magic TURBO button!!!
hmmmm nitros injection straight into the cpu.... :p
Click to expand...
LOL that computer I referred to also had a turbo button! It was an 8086 that I think ran at 10 MHz w/ turbo and 6 MHz w/o. The computer even had an actual keylock on it that came with a key. :eek:

Ahh, the good old days ... minus the CGA graphics, no sound, no optical drives, etc. :p

One of these "high end" computer makers (Alienware, etc.) should make one that has a NOS button. :cool:
 
beowulf7 said:
LOL that computer I referred to also had a turbo button! It was an 8086 that I think ran at 10 MHz w/ turbo and 6 MHz w/o. The computer even had an actual keylock on it that came with a key. :eek:

Ahh, the good old days ... minus the CGA graphics, no sound, no optical drives, etc. :p

One of these "high end" computer makers (Alienware, etc.) should make one that has a NOS button. :cool:
Click to expand...

yep, they should.
I would love to see a display that states your current cpu speed and a turbo button next to it, push and get a 10-15% boost
:D
 
tdg said:
I must be getting old when I still recall being amazed that a 1 GB drive was available to consumers and wondered how I'd ever fill something that huge. Now were approaching 1000x larger :(
Click to expand...

I remember my father and I buying a 400MB hdd for over $400. and I'm only 27.
 
wait, that turbo button actually made it go faster? i dont remember that.
I do remember pressing it and watching it go from 25 to 33Mhz... but i thought that was just the led changing numbers... i dont remember it actually doing something...

rice ur pc w/ the turbo led that shows fake numbers... hrm.....
 
Bookmage said:
wait, that turbo button actually made it go faster? i dont remember that.
I do remember pressing it and watching it go from 25 to 33Mhz... but i thought that was just the led changing numbers... i dont remember it actually doing something...

rice ur pc w/ the turbo led that shows fake numbers... hrm.....
Click to expand...

lol.. what it did was it activated the second math processor on the DX4? (or was it DX2) was it chip and then it could do more work.
i think thats how it worked.
 
osalcido said:
you people talking about 1gb hard drives are old... face it :)
Click to expand...

I remember taking a loan from my dad because I found a hot deal at microcenter where I bought a 2.5G drive for around $240.

In my first 486 I paid over $600 for the 16M of ram it came with. At the time most boxes were shipping with 4MB. My friend had a P75 with 8MB and we had a "load doom(1) race". I made a ram drive and my 486 DX2/50 loaded it faster than his P75.

We also played 3 player doom1 via a serial program....I'd bring my box over to his house and attach via serial and his modem would call his buddy 2 blocks away & we'd play 3 player together! For the life of me I can't remember the name of that program...Hm I think it was jserver. Google it!

I remember a year+ before quake1 came out there were huge debates in usenet about what quake would & wouldn't have.

I remember using gopher before the web

I remember e-mail without spam

Yes, I am old (31 in oct).
 
Megalomaniac said:
yep, they should.
I would love to see a display that states your current cpu speed and a turbo button next to it, push and get a 10-15% boost
:D
Click to expand...
Maybe if in a future "Fast and the Furious" movie, if Paul Walker uses a modded computer that has NOS or turbo, we'll see that "option" available on custom computer builders, or ... *gasp* ... on a Dell XPS desktop. :D
 
Does seagate make a 500gb with perpendicular tech? or is it just their latest 750gb?
 
Yashu said:
Does seagate make a 500gb with perpendicular tech? or is it just their latest 750gb?
Click to expand...

Yes, the 7200.10 comes in both 500 and 750 flavors, along with 250 and 400 I believe.
 
osalcido said:
you people talking about 1gb hard drives are old... face it :)
Click to expand...
Erm, right. My first hard disk was only 500MB and I'm only 16 :p

But back on topic; I'm seeing a patern with drive sizes. There was a slow climb from MB to GB, but once we broke about 4GB, sizes went through the roof and prices went down.
I'm expecting the same thing with GB to TB, were approching the end of clawing for GB, its just a matter of time before we see the first 20, 40, and 60TB hard disks.
 
Megalomaniac said:
i wonder how the new 7200.10 320 stacks up against the WD 320s?
Click to expand...
depends. I heard that there are different versions, some with more, some with fewer platters. There's a thread on Storagereview.
 
Megalomaniac said:
lol.. what it did was it activated the second math processor on the DX4? (or was it DX2) was it chip and then it could do more work.
i think thats how it worked.
Click to expand...

No it was mainly designed to reduce the processor speeds for compatibility reasons. It has nothing to do with enabling or disabling a co processor. It was purely a clock speed issue.
 
It's a waterfall effect. The areal density between platters is not always the same. It depends on how the head tests out, some are stronger than others. The 750 and 500 are both 4 platter drives. After being built, the ones who's heads test the strongest become 750s and the rest get formatted as 500gb drives.
 
StorageJoe said:
It's a waterfall effect. The areal density between platters is not always the same. It depends on how the head tests out, some are stronger than others. The 750 and 500 are both 4 platter drives. After being built, the ones who's heads test the strongest become 750s and the rest get formatted as 500gb drives.
Click to expand...

i would of thought the 500g would only be 3 x 188G platters as it would save costs tossing in 3 platters vs 4, but i guess streamlining the manufactuering process is better.
 
MrGuvernment said:
i would of thought the 500g would only be 3 x 188G platters as it would save costs tossing in 3 platters vs 4, but i guess streamlining the manufactuering process is better.
Click to expand...
Building a 564GB disk and then capping it to 500 is a 12% waste. I don't think anyone would do that, even if 500GB disks are easier to market.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top