Seagate will release 20TB hard drives this year, 40TB by 2023 using HAMR technology

>Seagate will release 20TB hard drives this year, 40TB by 2023 using HAMR technology
WD on suicide watch.
computerweekly.com/news/252455569/20TB-hard-drives-expected-in-2019-as-Seagate-HAMR-is-tested-by-NetApp

Attached: 6IxCnEb-_400x400.jpg (400x400, 11K)

Other urls found in this thread:

tweaktown.com/articles/6028/dispelling-backblaze-s-hdd-reliability-myth-the-real-story-covered/index.html
youtu.be/aUHAd36BDTc
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Are they actually going to be the same or cheaper per gigabyte than HDDs now? If they charge a premium HAMR stuff it's still going to get dabbed on by SSDs, tape and even regular hard drives.

>seagate introduces !NEW! hard drive technology..
yea eh, nope, thanks.

>its another WD shill gets btfo episode

Attached: WDisfuckingshit.jpg (720x820, 82K)

>Gee Mom, whats that big green skyscraper in the middle called?
>the big, super tall one reaching the clouds? Thats called 'Seagates rep being flushed', Son

The dual mechanical heads had my attention most since even in lower capacity drives that's useful as fuck
I know this is Seagate but I'd love to have faster read/write in general

How about an ssd?

My problem is storage capacity, not speed. I'm patient but I'd be down to use faster drives. SSDs don't provide enough space for my needs
Archiving a fuckton of stuff demands space I don't have. Tapes are my go to until hdds have a whole lot more space for their price

It's green like the algae growing on all the dead Seagate hard drives in the dump. The swirl is to remind you of the money you just flushed down the toilet.
SEAGATE A SHIT

ALZHEIMER DRIVES

FRIENDS DON'T LET FRIENDS BUY SEAGATE

>tape
i take it your dad works at nintendo too?

Capacity for price is important to me
Speed is important for the job even though I'm a patient man. The customer isn't as patient so I have to compromise somewhere

>ALZHEIMER DRIVES
kek - seashills selling seashit absolutely BTFO

If Seagate can have such a big change over the course of a year, I'm pretty curious what this would look like updated
Also note the sample size difference

MAMR (using microwaves and not heat) is better, and that's WD's tech

>carefully ignoring the 7% increase in reliability from 2015 to 2016
t. WD shill

that's great and all, but the real concern is getting the cost down. if that doesn't happen, then cheapo SSDs are easily going to overtake hard drives

10TB drives will be $150 by the end of the year if not cheaper

a 40TB HDD costing an arm and a leg will still be cheaper than a 40TB SSD

>WD shill
I don't think there are any other drive shills here. There's always anti seagate and anti ssd but nothing else.
Anyway the seagate iron wolfs are cheaper than wd reds right now so they're my goto for the moment, just waiting for 10TB stuff to not be 50% more expensive than 8TB.

I was hoping the recent drop in ssd price would bring spinning rust down as well, but wd and seagate are probably laughing at QLC and not caring.

She shills Seashills by the Sea shore.

>laughing at QLC
That's exactly my reaction when I saw that for $10-$15 more you get the same capacity but with TLC

sure, with the current cost of flash storage. but once SSDs reach TRUE mass adoption (many people use them now, but hard disks still largely overtake them), the price of flash chips will go down.

That fucking chart isn't even reliable. That stupid company that made it had some water damage and they had to replace hard drives so they ran around pulling drives out of external casings then strapping them to racks.

tweaktown.com/articles/6028/dispelling-backblaze-s-hdd-reliability-myth-the-real-story-covered/index.html

Attached: 1545169329115.png (816x795, 217K)

Why do so many trap artists draw the penis as this weird round ball

>20TB
jesus

Attached: 1468950650321.jpg (600x507, 23K)

Is SSD tape as cool as Cassette tape?

because theirs is fucking miniscule and they've never seen a large one irl

Seagate products always break so who gives a shit about their chink tier 20TB drives

imagine being retarded enough to not only trust seagate hard drives, but to also trust a single hard drive to store 20 tb data

>youtu.be/aUHAd36BDTc
>So where we are today with what we call 'Perpendicular Magnetic Recording' - the magnetization zone is perpendicular to the surface in a disc so you can think of it as little magnets pointing up and down, that represents the data that you want to store on the disc
>At some point these little magnets become unstable, just from the thermal energy around the room, they can actually flip
>So what we had to do with 'Heat-Assisted Magnetic Recording', or HAMR, is come up with a whole new recording material that is very, very hard to flip
>So what we've had to do is add some extra energy into the system, and the energy we're adding is heat
>In HAMR we couple a laser light into the recording head, focus that laser light into very small spots, and that heats up the media to a point where it's easier to flip the magnetization
>So we're heating up the recording material to 450C and then cooling it back down to room temperature all in a nanosecond
that sounds like HAMR drives will be way more durable and resistant to heat
I'd like to see the SAS version

Attached: ASTC-Technology-Roadmap.png (1000x628, 180K)

only bad seagate was

Attached: .png (672x760, 84K)

>2014
Keep seething dumb WD shill
>That stupid company that made it had some water damage and they had to replace hard drives so they ran around pulling drives out of external casings then strapping them to racks.
You got it completely wrong, they bought external HD's and removed them from their casings during the days of the HDD shortage from the Thailand floods, stupid newfag

>that sounds like HAMR drives will be way more durable and resistant to heat
yeaah? all sounds like untested theoretical BS with multiple points of failure to me. Ive no idea what the obsession with cramming things into smaller and smaller spaces is anyway, you just ensuring things ded of heat failure. Id happily for a 20TB the size of shoebox, as long as reliable

>Have RAID of 40TB drives
>Read/write speed is Takes a week to rebuild array
>Another drive dies and wipes data

He's not talking about flash. A huge problem for servers and CDNs is how much shit people want to put on the internet so they're constantly expanding their storage racks. Volume density is the least of their concerns, the first is the unit cost. Unless these things offer lower cost per GB I don't see them really going anywhere

>cost
>cost
>cost

FUCKING COST at the moment they just ADD 2 terrabytes and ADD $100 to the cost. 10 12 14 are just too fucking expensive this is a joke.

Im way overdue to upgrade my storage im about to begrudingly drop AU $350 on a WD RED 8tb because im sick to death of juggling all my aold 1tb and 2tb and gazillion more smaller shitty mirrors

Attached: 1543879009285.jpg (457x439, 35K)

This my two 4tb are just about full and over 5 years old when the fuck will some affordable hdds come out?
Sick of this overpriced 8tb shit and 16tb not even a thing why is every bit of tech stagnating?
On the upside ssds will catchup very soon

>$350
jesus christ

That's why raid6 exists. If necessary, somebody will come up with an algorithm for more spare drives - if that does not already exist.

>20TB HDD
>starts reallocating sectors in 20 minutes

Yet, people still cite Backblaze as why they dislike Seagate. It doesn't work both ways.

SMR was okay as long as it wasn't used as primary storage. For a second there it was the cheapest way to get 8TB. Drive reliability is less important depending on what tier of data we're talking. I'd try out HMR in a backup device for sure.

Can we add 2017 and 2018 to that to get a nice 5-year chart?

That's what I said you complete retard. I don't own a single fucking wd drive and I have 20tb++ of seagate drives. I'm not shilling for wd you autist I'm saying backblaze skewed seagates failure rates by buying external HDDs by seagate and removing them from their enclosures. What the fuck is your reading comprehension?

Except that I think seagate is the best hdd manufacturer and Hitachi is the worst.

Did Seagate finally stop paying their workers in crack rocks in 2016?

I'm looking to build a 4x NAS real soon and the cost on 4tb> drives is insane.

4x 10tb drives is literally 4x the cost of the entire rackmount nas i was looking at. I can afford it, but im just a small home user who needs a long term networked project backup with redundancy for music projects.

NAS no problems, that'll be 500. oh you want to make it 20tb and have proper redundancy, that'll be 2000 extra plus tip please. It would be nice if i could get like 6tb or 8tb drives for like 100 each.

The way SSD's are going it might be better to wait a year and go the SSD raid route instead, at least if they fail i have read only.

Over what period of time?

and for those whom ask, why would you even need 20tb? im trying to future proof somewhat for the next ten years. I'd like more, but i cant afford 4x14tb drives.

4x14tb drives and the nas im looking at would cost me $3200 US. 4x10tb would cost me $2000 US.

I have a home studio setup that allows for 18 track simultaneous recording, and im getting into making my own music videos and videos for friends bands, so that involves 1080p editing at minimum. a 4-8tb NAS as a primary networked backup probably isnt going to cut it.

Maybe i need to start charging my buddies operating costs or backup to blu-rays instead.

>for the next ten years
That's not a thing in computers bro.

I feel you bro, i honestly might just buy a small as fuck NAS 2-8tb max instead of going big like i was going to, and use a smaller affordable one as my network access for my sample library and just backup project files onto blurays.

Can wait out the SSD cap increases for a decade. Maybe in 5-10 years a 16tb SSD will be affordable.

It is in music tech, i still have a working 1980s atari ST that i used for midi with cubase, i know people who still use them with 25 year old samplers. I know a crazy bastard who still uses SCSI hard drives in samplers, i converted mine WITH scsi-sd adaptors years ago, though i still use floppies on rare occasions.

The comment was meant more towards 10 years of network backup that isnt cloud bullshit that i dont have direct control of, if i get drive failures its my understanding i can swap out the drives, i was allowing for a 2x failure, at any one time. That seems reasonable.

>might be better to wait a year and go the SSD raid route instead,

yeah we are getting really squeezed hard here and there is just that temptation to wait for flash to achieve parity. Its fucked. Im just gonna pull the trigger on a single 8tb to give me some headroom till the end of the year and hold off on autisticly mirroring everything.

Also music bro i hear you. Im huge in 5.6mhz DSD and my music library is topping 4 terrabytes plus.

Also while looking today i was actuallly really supprised to see how much a 5Ttb 2.5 inch cost. Means i can have all my meme music on the go. All my portable drives have been absolutely bullet proof.

Let's be honest, HDD's in excess of the optimal price/size ratio are a niche market.

Why HDD industry will not be simply abandoned in favor of SSD?

Attached: apu question.jpg (240x184, 5K)

god thank god my plex server is filling drives non fucking stop

HDD's will always be cheaper per gb, but people will move away when SSD's get to the point that half terabyte and terabyte models cross the threshold of being optimal. HDD's will always be around for mass storage, but we'll soon see a point where most normal builds go full solid state.

Why would WD be on suicide watch? I'd be very surprised of WD couldn't build a 40TB hard disk in 2023.

Hitachi has never failed me at all. Seagate has a high failure rate on my end.

> at least if they fail i have read only
Theoretically that can also happen, but I've only ever experienced "fail and drive is completely dead" and it almost seems like that's more common online, too.

Just build a NAS with 8 or 10TB drives if you need it, the cost per TB likely won't be surpassed soon by SSD.

*clack clack clack*

Before the clack
That audio distorion like someone drug a needle across a record.

No, HDDs are already losing the data density battle and GB/$$$ ratio.
These new read/write methods aren't actually that *new*. They are last gasps of a technology reaching its dead-end. They weren't used before out of the lab because they were too expensive and unreliable.That hasn't change at all.

I wouldn't be too shock if HAMR and DLMR drives have even shorter life expediencies then the current crop of PMR HDDs. Disaster recovery would also be an impossibility.

The same reason why tapedrives are still used a fuckton for enterprise storage and archiving.

They should already be at that point. Base level drive costs are 40dollars and that's 256gb ssd or 2tb hdd. For the majority of users the 256 is plenty, talking mums laptop on Facebook here. For Jow Forums tier users and gaymers there's 1TB ssds for 100 dollars. Hopefully 2.5 inch hdds die out soon and everything goes into 3.5 inch drives for servers and desktop attached storage. It's like oems are only still selling 500GB and 1TB hdds to get rid of the old stock and that idiots still buy the bigger is better meme.

Can't wait to lose 20tb all at once

>Seagate
no thx, I had 10x 3TB died on me

5x8 TB WD reds would cost about $1500 in my country for 24 TB with 2 drive redundancy. As for the NAS, just build your own instead of buying pre-built garbage with proprietary shitware.

>spinning rusty metal disks
What year is this?

>40TB storage drives for my backup server
ROCK FUCKING SOLID, BOYS

Attached: 1544550594631.gif (800x430, 564K)

because they're dumb, nothing else

Because it gets bunched up like that under skintight clothes when it's flaccid.

interested in that MACH 2 shit
if it's 480MB/s 1-way and on SATA

It's going to saturate sata3 soon and there's no sata4 planned. Are you ready for pcie4 1x cables for NVME hdds?