XFX Radeon RX 5600 XT THICC 3 review
Fractal Design Define 7 XL review
Guru3D Rig of the Month - January 2020
Palit GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER GamingPro review
Team Group T-Force DarkZα 3600 MHz DDR4 review
Corsair Scimitar Elite RGB gaming mouse review
Cougar 700K Evo keyboard review
Aorus Liquid Cooler 360 review
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X review
Corsair A500 CPU air cooler review
HDDs with HAMR HD Density based Platters bring 80 TB HDDs on the horizon
The entire technology industry is always innovating and evolving. While for lower capacity and volume SSDs are your best option, for mass storage the HDD seems to stay around for a long time as companies still are actively developing their tech.
The latest technology development for HDD platters is coming from SDK Japanese company Showa Denko KK (SDK). Their High-Density HAMR technology is making use of something we've discussed a couple of time already, heat-assisted magnetic recording (HAMR), now updated allowing for way more density. The claim is now that 3.5-inch HDDs can reach capacities of 70 to 80 even TB.
HAMR represents a recording method in which magnetic film is locally heated at the time of recording. This technology has been developed to solve the “magnetic recording trilemma”: difficulty in simultaneously meeting the three requirements of fine-particle structure, resistance to thermal fluctuation, and ease of magnetization. Compared with the recording density of approx. 1.14 Tb/in2 for HD media based on conventional magnetic recording methods, it is said that HAMR-based HD media will achieve recording density of 5-6 Tb/in2 in the future. Provided that the same number of disks are used, it is estimated that a 3.5-inch HDD will achieve storage capacity of approx. 70-80 TB per unit.
The innovation here is based on a thin magnetic layer with an allow of iron and platinum, that created very small crystal particles on that platter, allowed to be written. The materials have another advantage, they can withstand heat quite well.
SDK make any bold claims in terms of specifications, but it does indicate that GAMR discs should be able to reach 5 to 6 Tb per square inch. Currently, that is 1.14 Tb per square inch. So the value that is easily quadrupled. It is uncertain if and when the new technology will go into production.
Sources: SDK via Hardware.info
Western Digital Offers Ultrastar DC HC620 HDD with 15TB storage volume - 10/25/2018 07:39 AM
Western Digital today announced the industry's highest capacity HDD, the 15 TB Ultrastar DC HC620 host-managed SMR HDD. The Ultrastar DC HC620 delivers an unprecedented capacity point with a time-to-...
Toshiba Launches World’s First 14TB HDD with Conventional Magnetic Recording - 12/08/2017 09:16 AM
Toshiba announced the launch of the MG07ACA Series, the world’s firs1 enterprise 14TB Conventional Magnetic Recording (CMR) HDD. Using a 9-disk, helium-sealed design, the new MG07ACA Serie...
Patriot Gauntlet 320 HDD with 802.11n WiFi and USB 3.0 - 10/17/2012 05:24 AM
Patriot Memory will launch the Gauntlet 320, a new portable 320GB HDD that features 802.11b/g/n WiFi as well as USB 3.0 connectivity.
Seagate first to debut HDD with 1TB platters - 05/04/2011 09:14 AM
Seagate today unveiled the world
Verbatim InSight HDD with status display - 08/18/2009 07:56 AM
Verbatim have announced a new external hard-drive, though you
RavenMaster
Senior Member
Posts: 1105
Joined: 2009-08-19
Senior Member
Posts: 1105
Joined: 2009-08-19
#5758329 Posted on: 02/07/2020 03:29 PM
I haven't touched a mechanical hard drive since 2015 and would never go back to using them. Your basic SATA SSD's are reasonably priced, plenty faster and with no moving parts inside them, less likely to skip (in a laptop) or break. And they run silent.
NVMe SSD's offer even better performance with insane speeds and now they're cheap enough to buy with decent capacities that you can use them as your main OS drive and for storage. They take up far less space too.
I haven't touched a mechanical hard drive since 2015 and would never go back to using them. Your basic SATA SSD's are reasonably priced, plenty faster and with no moving parts inside them, less likely to skip (in a laptop) or break. And they run silent.
NVMe SSD's offer even better performance with insane speeds and now they're cheap enough to buy with decent capacities that you can use them as your main OS drive and for storage. They take up far less space too.
theoneofgod
Senior Member
Posts: 4144
Joined: 2014-01-17
Senior Member
Posts: 4144
Joined: 2014-01-17
#5758337 Posted on: 02/07/2020 03:48 PM
I haven't touched a mechanical hard drive since 2015 and would never go back to using them. Your basic SATA SSD's are reasonably priced, plenty faster and with no moving parts inside them, less likely to skip (in a laptop) or break. And they run silent.
NVMe SSD's offer even better performance with insane speeds and now they're cheap enough to buy with decent capacities that you can use them as your main OS drive and for storage. They take up far less space too.
That's fine for some but for the price of a 2TB SSD, you can buy say 10-12TB HDD. If you need mass storage, SSD's are nowhere near there, price per TB anyway.
I haven't touched a mechanical hard drive since 2015 and would never go back to using them. Your basic SATA SSD's are reasonably priced, plenty faster and with no moving parts inside them, less likely to skip (in a laptop) or break. And they run silent.
NVMe SSD's offer even better performance with insane speeds and now they're cheap enough to buy with decent capacities that you can use them as your main OS drive and for storage. They take up far less space too.
That's fine for some but for the price of a 2TB SSD, you can buy say 10-12TB HDD. If you need mass storage, SSD's are nowhere near there, price per TB anyway.
TLD LARS
Senior Member
Posts: 133
Joined: 2017-03-01
Senior Member
Posts: 133
Joined: 2017-03-01
#5758356 Posted on: 02/07/2020 04:53 PM
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The is still no replacement for large capacity spinning disks for bulk storrage.
example:
2x 16TB harddrives in raid 1 for safety.
8x 4 TB SSDs are needed to reach the same capacity and mirror backup.
I do not think "normal" of the shelf motherboards are able to run hardware raid with 8 drives, so software raid needs to be used, with all the added performance hit on the CPU required to monitor 8 drives in software.
Not everyone needs this much capacity, but a streamer or youtuber could easily reach those numbers, if they save there videos locally.
NVMe SSD's offer even better performance with insane speeds and now they're cheap enough to buy with decent capacities that you can use them as your main OS drive and for storage. They take up far less space too.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The is still no replacement for large capacity spinning disks for bulk storrage.
example:
2x 16TB harddrives in raid 1 for safety.
8x 4 TB SSDs are needed to reach the same capacity and mirror backup.
I do not think "normal" of the shelf motherboards are able to run hardware raid with 8 drives, so software raid needs to be used, with all the added performance hit on the CPU required to monitor 8 drives in software.
Not everyone needs this much capacity, but a streamer or youtuber could easily reach those numbers, if they save there videos locally.
Silva
Senior Member
Posts: 1034
Joined: 2013-06-04
Senior Member
Posts: 1034
Joined: 2013-06-04
#5758476 Posted on: 02/07/2020 10:27 PM
80TB is astonishing, considering that my first PC came with a 7Gb HDD or so. For long years to come HDD will still be the go to for mass storage and archival needs.
I've been using SSD for boot drive for a couple years now and just invested on an NVMe. I wouldn't go back to HDD, but the price just isn't there for SSD storage.
The common mortal will use maybe a fast 512Gb/1Tb NVMe as a boot drive and a 1/2Tb SATA SSD for casual storage. Then have External HDD as needed to have an offline archive to go back to.
80TB is astonishing, considering that my first PC came with a 7Gb HDD or so. For long years to come HDD will still be the go to for mass storage and archival needs.
I've been using SSD for boot drive for a couple years now and just invested on an NVMe. I wouldn't go back to HDD, but the price just isn't there for SSD storage.
The common mortal will use maybe a fast 512Gb/1Tb NVMe as a boot drive and a 1/2Tb SATA SSD for casual storage. Then have External HDD as needed to have an offline archive to go back to.
tsunami231
Senior Member
Posts: 9943
Joined: 2003-05-24
Senior Member
Posts: 9943
Joined: 2003-05-24
#5758487 Posted on: 02/07/2020 11:31 PM
80TB is astonishing, considering that my first PC came with a 7Gb HDD or so. For long years to come HDD will still be the go to for mass storage and archival needs.
I've been using SSD for boot drive for a couple years now and just invested on an NVMe. I wouldn't go back to HDD, but the price just isn't there for SSD storage.
The common mortal will use maybe a fast 512Gb/1Tb NVMe as a boot drive and a 1/2Tb SATA SSD for casual storage. Then have External HDD as needed to have an offline archive to go back to.
my first pc came with not even 5mb harddrive i feel old, then again my body make me feel even older with all pain i have... anywho I just recently swaped over to all SSD, i would never want to go back to HDD for anything other then pure storage space, unless HDD have some huge break threw that increases here speed to near SSD speeds.
SSD are nice but there storage space to price ratio is anything but close to HDD prices, just recently 1tb ssd droped to under 100$ which still way to much.
80TB is astonishing, considering that my first PC came with a 7Gb HDD or so. For long years to come HDD will still be the go to for mass storage and archival needs.
I've been using SSD for boot drive for a couple years now and just invested on an NVMe. I wouldn't go back to HDD, but the price just isn't there for SSD storage.
The common mortal will use maybe a fast 512Gb/1Tb NVMe as a boot drive and a 1/2Tb SATA SSD for casual storage. Then have External HDD as needed to have an offline archive to go back to.
my first pc came with not even 5mb harddrive i feel old, then again my body make me feel even older with all pain i have... anywho I just recently swaped over to all SSD, i would never want to go back to HDD for anything other then pure storage space, unless HDD have some huge break threw that increases here speed to near SSD speeds.
SSD are nice but there storage space to price ratio is anything but close to HDD prices, just recently 1tb ssd droped to under 100$ which still way to much.
SHS
Senior Member
Posts: 442
Joined: 2001-05-02
Senior Member
Posts: 442
Joined: 2001-05-02
#5758507 Posted on: 02/08/2020 01:25 AM
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The is still no replacement for large capacity spinning disks for bulk storrage.
example:
2x 16TB harddrives in raid 1 for safety.
8x 4 TB SSDs are needed to reach the same capacity and mirror backup.
I do not think "normal" of the shelf motherboards are able to run hardware raid with 8 drives, so software raid needs to be used, with all the added performance hit on the CPU required to monitor 8 drives in software.
Not everyone needs this much capacity, but a streamer or youtuber could easily reach those numbers, if they save there videos locally.
RavenMaster is for sure off his rocker as small nas with will still cost you arm & leg as much new car
You forgot yes DVR and DVD/Blu-ray Movie user
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The is still no replacement for large capacity spinning disks for bulk storrage.
example:
2x 16TB harddrives in raid 1 for safety.
8x 4 TB SSDs are needed to reach the same capacity and mirror backup.
I do not think "normal" of the shelf motherboards are able to run hardware raid with 8 drives, so software raid needs to be used, with all the added performance hit on the CPU required to monitor 8 drives in software.
Not everyone needs this much capacity, but a streamer or youtuber could easily reach those numbers, if they save there videos locally.
RavenMaster is for sure off his rocker as small nas with will still cost you arm & leg as much new car
You forgot yes DVR and DVD/Blu-ray Movie user
kendoka15
Senior Member
Posts: 117
Joined: 2014-03-14
Senior Member
Posts: 117
Joined: 2014-03-14
#5758521 Posted on: 02/08/2020 02:51 AM
It annoys me to no end when people claim HDDs have no purpose anymore because apparently SSDs are dirt cheap. Try finding a high capacity SSD, oh wait those don't exist. Try finding a medium capacity SSD that doesn't cost A LOT more than a similarly sized HDD. Oh wait, those don't exist. The cheapest 2TB SSD I can find on newegg.com is a Crucial BX500 for $200 USD. I can find many HDDs of a similar size for a quarter of the price, from reputable brands like WD. Mass storage still requires HDDs, unless you're made of money or don't need more than a few TB.
It annoys me to no end when people claim HDDs have no purpose anymore because apparently SSDs are dirt cheap. Try finding a high capacity SSD, oh wait those don't exist. Try finding a medium capacity SSD that doesn't cost A LOT more than a similarly sized HDD. Oh wait, those don't exist. The cheapest 2TB SSD I can find on newegg.com is a Crucial BX500 for $200 USD. I can find many HDDs of a similar size for a quarter of the price, from reputable brands like WD. Mass storage still requires HDDs, unless you're made of money or don't need more than a few TB.
0blivious
Senior Member
Posts: 2639
Joined: 2006-04-25
Senior Member
Posts: 2639
Joined: 2006-04-25
#5758552 Posted on: 02/08/2020 09:41 AM
That is big. My first PC came with no usable internal space, just a cassette drive and floppy drive. 80TB is pretty amazing. At least today. Give it some years, this will be smaller than what we have in our mobile devices.
That is big. My first PC came with no usable internal space, just a cassette drive and floppy drive. 80TB is pretty amazing. At least today. Give it some years, this will be smaller than what we have in our mobile devices.
Astyanax
Senior Member
Posts: 4755
Joined: 2018-03-21
Senior Member
Posts: 4755
Joined: 2018-03-21
#5758637 Posted on: 02/08/2020 06:52 PM
SATA HDD's are at a dead end.
time to move to SAS HDD's with multiple actuators
SATA HDD's are at a dead end.
time to move to SAS HDD's with multiple actuators
wavetrex
Senior Member
Posts: 771
Joined: 2008-07-16
Senior Member
Posts: 771
Joined: 2008-07-16
#5758742 Posted on: 02/09/2020 02:06 AM
SATA HDD's are at a dead end.
time to move to SAS HDD's with multiple actuators
As an owner of several HDD's of 14TB capacity, I would say you are correct.
It takes FOREVER for the drive to be scanned or loaded with data or that data being read.
It basically reads/writes at around ~115-120 MB/s average... that's almost 120.000 seconds for accessing the drive fully filled, or 33 hours of continuous data flux. Insane !
... however that doesn't mean that the drives with this new tech in the article will be equally slow. It's already possible to hit 300 MB/s with high-end speed-oriented HDDs, and with denser bit packing, they will most likely hit the 550 MB/s limit of SATA 3.
But, the "cheap" drives for consumers (like those in External boxes) will probably be as slow as today. I don't want to imagine the amount of patience needed to fill or read a 40TB drive with just 110 MB/s...
---
But on the subject of "HDD's are dead", everyone saying that is so far away from reality, it's not even funny.
You use Youtube ? Well, you're watching a video stored on a HDD.
So look at somebody's funny pic on Facebook ? It comes from a HDD.
You read your G-mail ? It's read from a HDD.
Or maybe you read an article on guru3d.com?... I can bet that the major part of this site is still stored on HDDs.
Enough said...
SATA HDD's are at a dead end.
time to move to SAS HDD's with multiple actuators
As an owner of several HDD's of 14TB capacity, I would say you are correct.
It takes FOREVER for the drive to be scanned or loaded with data or that data being read.
It basically reads/writes at around ~115-120 MB/s average... that's almost 120.000 seconds for accessing the drive fully filled, or 33 hours of continuous data flux. Insane !
... however that doesn't mean that the drives with this new tech in the article will be equally slow. It's already possible to hit 300 MB/s with high-end speed-oriented HDDs, and with denser bit packing, they will most likely hit the 550 MB/s limit of SATA 3.
But, the "cheap" drives for consumers (like those in External boxes) will probably be as slow as today. I don't want to imagine the amount of patience needed to fill or read a 40TB drive with just 110 MB/s...
---
But on the subject of "HDD's are dead", everyone saying that is so far away from reality, it's not even funny.
You use Youtube ? Well, you're watching a video stored on a HDD.
So look at somebody's funny pic on Facebook ? It comes from a HDD.
You read your G-mail ? It's read from a HDD.
Or maybe you read an article on guru3d.com?... I can bet that the major part of this site is still stored on HDDs.
Enough said...
Venix
Senior Member
Posts: 1070
Joined: 2016-08-01
Senior Member
Posts: 1070
Joined: 2016-08-01
#5758745 Posted on: 02/09/2020 02:18 AM
@wavetrex people so often think only about their use case thinking is the onlyway and only use case sadly , companies still back up terabytes on tape !
@wavetrex people so often think only about their use case thinking is the onlyway and only use case sadly , companies still back up terabytes on tape !
Astyanax
Senior Member
Posts: 4755
Joined: 2018-03-21
Senior Member
Posts: 4755
Joined: 2018-03-21
#5758746 Posted on: 02/09/2020 02:35 AM
I don't think (or atleast haven't seen any evidence of) HAMR drives coming in SATA interface.
... however that doesn't mean that the drives with this new tech in the article will be equally slow. It's already possible to hit 300 MB/s with high-end speed-oriented HDDs, and with denser bit packing, they will most likely hit the 550 MB/s limit of SATA 3.
I don't think (or atleast haven't seen any evidence of) HAMR drives coming in SATA interface.
Stormyandcold
Senior Member
Posts: 5287
Joined: 2003-09-15
Senior Member
Posts: 5287
Joined: 2003-09-15
#5758857 Posted on: 02/09/2020 08:47 PM
Nice. However, just thinking about backing-up the backup is giving me more grey hairs lol.
Nice. However, just thinking about backing-up the backup is giving me more grey hairs lol.
Mufflore
Senior Member
Posts: 11554
Joined: 2010-05-22
Senior Member
Posts: 11554
Joined: 2010-05-22
#5758859 Posted on: 02/09/2020 09:02 PM
From a home user perspective :
With current drive speeds, at best it will take 4.6 days of uninterrupted copying at 200MB/s to fill 80TB, 1.1 days for 20TB.
Backing it up will be just as much an issue.
Average speed of most drives (you will copy to/from) is much lower unless in RAID. You will be lucky to have near only 10% of the drives capacity in SSDs.
I also fear for its random access speed.
This isnt meant for home users yet, the price tag will dictate that.
But progress is progress. We will learn how reliable it is in the long term before it reaches mainstream. It will no doubt evolve.
I have to hope multi head controller drives become the norm, effectively RAID inside a single drive. This will reduce the storage space any head has to address making access times and read/write faster. Multi head can be used more creatively to allow multiple reads/writes simultaneously, giving the same benefit as independent drives
Wikip says ye normal 20TB HAMR drives are expected this year.
From a home user perspective :
With current drive speeds, at best it will take 4.6 days of uninterrupted copying at 200MB/s to fill 80TB, 1.1 days for 20TB.
Backing it up will be just as much an issue.
Average speed of most drives (you will copy to/from) is much lower unless in RAID. You will be lucky to have near only 10% of the drives capacity in SSDs.
I also fear for its random access speed.
This isnt meant for home users yet, the price tag will dictate that.
But progress is progress. We will learn how reliable it is in the long term before it reaches mainstream. It will no doubt evolve.
I have to hope multi head controller drives become the norm, effectively RAID inside a single drive. This will reduce the storage space any head has to address making access times and read/write faster. Multi head can be used more creatively to allow multiple reads/writes simultaneously, giving the same benefit as independent drives
Wikip says ye normal 20TB HAMR drives are expected this year.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 4702
Joined: 2012-11-10
Those are some impressive numbers, and will surely keep HDDs relevant a bit longer. These drives would be excellent for archiving, since their sequential read/write speeds ought to be very fast and they just have so much capacity. However, the random read speeds of these must be absolutely atrocious. You might need an SSD just for dedicating indexing, and another SSD for cache.