Zotac GeForce GTX 1650 Gaming Review
Team Group MP34 NVME SSD (512GB) review
Microsoft Office 2016 Pro and Windows 10 Pro for just $34
Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Gaming OC review
Anno 1800: PC graphics performance benchmark review
NZXT H500 Overwatch Special Edition review
Zotac GeForce GTX 1660 Twin Fan 6 GB Review
Corsair Carbide 275Q review
Cooler Master MK850 keyboard review
WD Blue SN500 NVME SSD (250GB) Review
Toshiba will release 14 TB HDD helium filled this year
Toshiba will release 14 TB HDD helium filled this year, at least that is what Toshiba stand staff at the Huawei Connect conference 2017 in Shanghai stated when asked about a 14TB helium-filled disk drive. It would arrive "very soon".
As reported by the register; they confirmed that meant before the end of the year. Such a capacity would leapfrog Seagate's 12TB helium-filled drive. Currently Toshiba's largest disk drive, the MN series NAS drive, holds 8TB, spins at 7,200rp, and uses a 6Gbit/s SATA interface. It was announced in April this year. We have no information on the coming drive's platter count or interface but it's probably going to be SATA.
Toshiba Announces 8TB X300 High-Performance HDD - 08/22/2017 04:28 PM
Toshiba today announces the X300 3.5-inch internal hard drive in 8TB capacity. Compared to the P300 series with capacities up to 3TB, the X300 Series delivers extreme performance and robust capacity ...
Toshiba Announces Next Generation Client SSD with 64-Layer 3D Flash Memory - 08/09/2017 07:37 AM
Toshiba announces the new SG6 series, the latest Toshiba client SSD to feature 64-layer, 3-bit-per-cell TLC (triple-level cell) BiCS FLASH to deliver better transfer speeds and power efficiency. This ...
Toshiba Announces NVMe over Fabrics - 08/08/2017 08:05 AM
Toshiba unveiled software technology essential to enabling deployment of NVMe-oF (NVM Express over Fabrics). This software stack deploys on storage servers, and provides critical solid state drive (SS...
Toshiba Introduces Enterprise-Class SSDs with 64-Layer 3D Flash Memory - 08/07/2017 02:06 PM
Toshiba today unveiled the development of two new flagship enterprise solid state drive (SSD) solutions, the TMC PM5 12Gbit/s SAS series and the CM5 NVM Express (NVMe)1 series. Development is expecte...
Toshiba shows 1 chip NVMe SSD with 64 layer 3D NAND - 08/03/2017 08:31 AM
Yeah, you can store a lot of GBs onto one Nand package with 64-layer NAND. Meet the future of your storage, the new BG3 series, and ultra small single chip NVME based M2 SSD passing 1500 MB/s....
Stairmand
Senior Member
Posts: 112
Joined: 2007-07-25
Senior Member
Posts: 112
Joined: 2007-07-25
#5469545 Posted on: 09/05/2017 08:28 PM
Great they are still increasing capacity, but (I suspect due to low demand) drive prices above 6TB are still stubbornly high.
Great they are still increasing capacity, but (I suspect due to low demand) drive prices above 6TB are still stubbornly high.
Reddoguk
Senior Member
Posts: 1641
Joined: 2010-05-26
Senior Member
Posts: 1641
Joined: 2010-05-26
#5469547 Posted on: 09/05/2017 08:32 PM
I think i would rather have 2x7TB than have a single massive 14TB drive. Like someone else said, that's a whole lot of data to lose on just one drive.
I think i would rather have 2x7TB than have a single massive 14TB drive. Like someone else said, that's a whole lot of data to lose on just one drive.
rl66
Senior Member
Posts: 1947
Joined: 2007-05-31
Senior Member
Posts: 1947
Joined: 2007-05-31
#5469580 Posted on: 09/05/2017 11:45 PM
yes the 4TB is still the best ratio data/price
Helium have no data on fail rates right now the tech is too young to use the data... also those HDD are made to be in raid and so the lost of data is clearly insinificant in the right config of raid.
Also HDD is still the best mass storage if you need space (SSD is too expensive for that)
Great they are still increasing capacity, but (I suspect due to low demand) drive prices above 6TB are still stubbornly high.
yes the 4TB is still the best ratio data/price
As much as i love the big space, the fail rates on traditional hard drives are far to high for me to want to trust 14TB worth of data on them!! specially in the UK when download speeds are still so slow, having to re-download everything would take weeks if not months!
Helium have no data on fail rates right now the tech is too young to use the data... also those HDD are made to be in raid and so the lost of data is clearly insinificant in the right config of raid.
Also HDD is still the best mass storage if you need space (SSD is too expensive for that)
CitizenZero
Member
Posts: 20
Joined: 2014-04-30
Member
Posts: 20
Joined: 2014-04-30
#5469632 Posted on: 09/06/2017 05:21 AM
That's why you are using RAID1 ,5 or 10 for those drives, never a single one for backup
As much as i love the big space, the fail rates on traditional hard drives are far to high for me to want to trust 14TB worth of data on them!! specially in the UK when download speeds are still so slow, having to re-download everything would take weeks if not months!
That's why you are using RAID1 ,5 or 10 for those drives, never a single one for backup
JonasBeckman
Senior Member
Posts: 15105
Joined: 2009-02-25
Senior Member
Posts: 15105
Joined: 2009-02-25
#5469637 Posted on: 09/06/2017 06:08 AM
You'd need two HDD's though so that would be expensive, both could fail too but that's rather unlikely to happen simultaneously I suppose.
(3+ Of these and the Steam library would be less of a issue though, ha ha.)
(And other media of whatever kind I suppose, music, movies, that anime collection no one must ever find and so on...)
You'd need two HDD's though so that would be expensive, both could fail too but that's rather unlikely to happen simultaneously I suppose.
(3+ Of these and the Steam library would be less of a issue though, ha ha.)
(And other media of whatever kind I suppose, music, movies, that anime collection no one must ever find and so on...)
allesclar
Senior Member
Posts: 5613
Joined: 2004-09-04
Senior Member
Posts: 5613
Joined: 2004-09-04
#5469648 Posted on: 09/06/2017 06:59 AM
FFS.
Why do we not just all downgrade our 2TB and 4TB drives back to 500MB drives of hell even 50MB drives because of the risk of losing "so much data"
Its an old invalid excuse and should be forgotten.
Its irrelevant as to how much data you have but more so how you back it up.
RAID 5 ( or X-RAID 2 in my case) gives me a 1 drive fail protection across my drives in my NAS. It is not the best i could do but the best i am willing to do considering the cost.
FFS.
Why do we not just all downgrade our 2TB and 4TB drives back to 500MB drives of hell even 50MB drives because of the risk of losing "so much data"
Its an old invalid excuse and should be forgotten.
Its irrelevant as to how much data you have but more so how you back it up.
RAID 5 ( or X-RAID 2 in my case) gives me a 1 drive fail protection across my drives in my NAS. It is not the best i could do but the best i am willing to do considering the cost.
allesclar
Senior Member
Posts: 5613
Joined: 2004-09-04
Senior Member
Posts: 5613
Joined: 2004-09-04
#5469649 Posted on: 09/06/2017 07:01 AM
RAID is not backup in a single sense.
If you had two NASs both in RAID, different locations and mirrored each other, that would be backup
RAID on its own is strictly not a backup, only redundancy if a drive fails, what if you have a 2 disk fail on a RAID 5 setup?
That's why you are using RAID1 ,5 or 10 for those drives, never a single one for backup
RAID is not backup in a single sense.
If you had two NASs both in RAID, different locations and mirrored each other, that would be backup
RAID on its own is strictly not a backup, only redundancy if a drive fails, what if you have a 2 disk fail on a RAID 5 setup?
allesclar
Senior Member
Posts: 5613
Joined: 2004-09-04
Senior Member
Posts: 5613
Joined: 2004-09-04
#5469650 Posted on: 09/06/2017 07:02 AM
yes the 4TB is still the best ratio data/price
Helium have no data on fail rates right now the tech is too young to use the data... also those HDD are made to be in raid and so the lost of data is clearly insinificant in the right config of raid.
Also HDD is still the best mass storage if you need space (SSD is too expensive for that)
Yes recently there was a Seagate Barracuda 4TB promotion on amazon, £88 each including free delivery and 2 year warranty.
yes the 4TB is still the best ratio data/price
Helium have no data on fail rates right now the tech is too young to use the data... also those HDD are made to be in raid and so the lost of data is clearly insinificant in the right config of raid.
Also HDD is still the best mass storage if you need space (SSD is too expensive for that)
Yes recently there was a Seagate Barracuda 4TB promotion on amazon, £88 each including free delivery and 2 year warranty.
Ricepudding
Senior Member
Posts: 452
Joined: 2017-02-17
Senior Member
Posts: 452
Joined: 2017-02-17
#5469668 Posted on: 09/06/2017 10:06 AM
That's why you are using RAID1 ,5 or 10 for those drives, never a single one for backup
Of course these would normally be used in raid, however then a lot of cost comes into play. I very much doubt these drives will be considered cheap. With a 10tb being £377 14TB I'd assume would be round the £500 mark, having to buy 2 or more would easily cost you over £1000. Could buy a brand new pc for that
FFS.
Why do we not just all downgrade our 2TB and 4TB drives back to 500MB drives of hell even 50MB drives because of the risk of losing "so much data"
Its an old invalid excuse and should be forgotten.
Its irrelevant as to how much data you have but more so how you back it up.
RAID 5 ( or X-RAID 2 in my case) gives me a 1 drive fail protection across my drives in my NAS. It is not the best i could do but the best i am willing to do considering the cost.
You seemed to have missed my point, as I said over here in the UK due to slow speeds on the internet to fill a 14TB back up after losing it would take forever, and the risk of losing that would be a lot to consider. Raid can help sure but straight away you double the cost or more depending on the set up. These might be good for businesses mind you who have the money and the right set ups for this.
That's why you are using RAID1 ,5 or 10 for those drives, never a single one for backup
Of course these would normally be used in raid, however then a lot of cost comes into play. I very much doubt these drives will be considered cheap. With a 10tb being £377 14TB I'd assume would be round the £500 mark, having to buy 2 or more would easily cost you over £1000. Could buy a brand new pc for that
FFS.
Why do we not just all downgrade our 2TB and 4TB drives back to 500MB drives of hell even 50MB drives because of the risk of losing "so much data"
Its an old invalid excuse and should be forgotten.
Its irrelevant as to how much data you have but more so how you back it up.
RAID 5 ( or X-RAID 2 in my case) gives me a 1 drive fail protection across my drives in my NAS. It is not the best i could do but the best i am willing to do considering the cost.
You seemed to have missed my point, as I said over here in the UK due to slow speeds on the internet to fill a 14TB back up after losing it would take forever, and the risk of losing that would be a lot to consider. Raid can help sure but straight away you double the cost or more depending on the set up. These might be good for businesses mind you who have the money and the right set ups for this.
holystarlight
Senior Member
Posts: 778
Joined: 2007-10-14
Senior Member
Posts: 778
Joined: 2007-10-14
#5469749 Posted on: 09/06/2017 03:31 PM
the WD helium drives are awesome 2 x 10tb in a raid mirrored to my NAS, no issues with them in my server, but it is pretty scary having 14tb of data all alone, but tbh anyone buying such a drive will most likely be mirroring the data somewhere for backup either a Raid/NAS/Cloud. you would be crazy not too.
the WD helium drives are awesome 2 x 10tb in a raid mirrored to my NAS, no issues with them in my server, but it is pretty scary having 14tb of data all alone, but tbh anyone buying such a drive will most likely be mirroring the data somewhere for backup either a Raid/NAS/Cloud. you would be crazy not too.
allesclar
Senior Member
Posts: 5613
Joined: 2004-09-04
Senior Member
Posts: 5613
Joined: 2004-09-04
#5469753 Posted on: 09/06/2017 03:43 PM
Of course these would normally be used in raid, however then a lot of cost comes into play. I very much doubt these drives will be considered cheap. With a 10tb being £377 14TB I'd assume would be round the £500 mark, having to buy 2 or more would easily cost you over £1000. Could buy a brand new pc for that
You seemed to have missed my point, as I said over here in the UK due to slow speeds on the internet to fill a 14TB back up after losing it would take forever, and the risk of losing that would be a lot to consider. Raid can help sure but straight away you double the cost or more depending on the set up. These might be good for businesses mind you who have the money and the right set ups for this.
I would hardly say 60Mbps is slow speed, as it is the main stream internet in the UK bar a few areas.
What on earth "internet" data do you need to re download on a media failure? Why do you need to keep a local copy of it if it is available on the internet?
If the risk of losing it is a lot to consider, then stop being a tight arse (not directed at you personally, just the user in general) and get the right solution for your needs.
£1000 provide an backed up solution for family photos and valuable data is a bargain to me.
Of course these would normally be used in raid, however then a lot of cost comes into play. I very much doubt these drives will be considered cheap. With a 10tb being £377 14TB I'd assume would be round the £500 mark, having to buy 2 or more would easily cost you over £1000. Could buy a brand new pc for that
You seemed to have missed my point, as I said over here in the UK due to slow speeds on the internet to fill a 14TB back up after losing it would take forever, and the risk of losing that would be a lot to consider. Raid can help sure but straight away you double the cost or more depending on the set up. These might be good for businesses mind you who have the money and the right set ups for this.
I would hardly say 60Mbps is slow speed, as it is the main stream internet in the UK bar a few areas.
What on earth "internet" data do you need to re download on a media failure? Why do you need to keep a local copy of it if it is available on the internet?
If the risk of losing it is a lot to consider, then stop being a tight arse (not directed at you personally, just the user in general) and get the right solution for your needs.
£1000 provide an backed up solution for family photos and valuable data is a bargain to me.
Clawedge
Senior Member
Posts: 2282
Joined: 2006-09-02
Senior Member
Posts: 2282
Joined: 2006-09-02
#5469845 Posted on: 09/07/2017 01:46 AM
i am curious about platter density, is it shingled or perpendicular?
i am curious about platter density, is it shingled or perpendicular?
Ricepudding
Senior Member
Posts: 452
Joined: 2017-02-17
Senior Member
Posts: 452
Joined: 2017-02-17
#5469923 Posted on: 09/07/2017 10:19 AM
I would hardly say 60Mbps is slow speed, as it is the main stream internet in the UK bar a few areas.
What on earth "internet" data do you need to re download on a media failure? Why do you need to keep a local copy of it if it is available on the internet?
If the risk of losing it is a lot to consider, then stop being a tight arse (not directed at you personally, just the user in general) and get the right solution for your needs.
£1000 provide an backed up solution for family photos and valuable data is a bargain to me.
The right solution for me is to get a SSD, the failure rates on those beyond those DOA are almost 0% with recent data showing many SSD's lasting well over 10 years
Personally the price isn't the big deal, it's just spending extra money to keep your back covered rather than using that money on a product that just works.
And beyond photos, the big stuff come in games, media, any videos i make for youtube VODs etc, i can quite easily fill a good 7-10TB of data
I would hardly say 60Mbps is slow speed, as it is the main stream internet in the UK bar a few areas.
What on earth "internet" data do you need to re download on a media failure? Why do you need to keep a local copy of it if it is available on the internet?
If the risk of losing it is a lot to consider, then stop being a tight arse (not directed at you personally, just the user in general) and get the right solution for your needs.
£1000 provide an backed up solution for family photos and valuable data is a bargain to me.
The right solution for me is to get a SSD, the failure rates on those beyond those DOA are almost 0% with recent data showing many SSD's lasting well over 10 years
Personally the price isn't the big deal, it's just spending extra money to keep your back covered rather than using that money on a product that just works.
And beyond photos, the big stuff come in games, media, any videos i make for youtube VODs etc, i can quite easily fill a good 7-10TB of data
thatguy91
Senior Member
Posts: 6650
Joined: 2010-08-27
Senior Member
Posts: 6650
Joined: 2010-08-27
#5469974 Posted on: 09/07/2017 01:35 PM
Depends on the drive classification. Desktop drives are designed for about 7 or so hours of light use a day. If you want reliability you need enterprise drives. They are more expensive. A good option I think are surveillance drives. Designed for 24/7 use, with constant writing of multiple streams.
Depends on the drive classification. Desktop drives are designed for about 7 or so hours of light use a day. If you want reliability you need enterprise drives. They are more expensive. A good option I think are surveillance drives. Designed for 24/7 use, with constant writing of multiple streams.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 452
Joined: 2017-02-17
As much as i love the big space, the fail rates on traditional hard drives are far to high for me to want to trust 14TB worth of data on them!! specially in the UK when download speeds are still so slow, having to re-download everything would take weeks if not months!