Did not take long. I asked why are HDDs are not operating like that 1st time I saw inside HDD. Just bit above 2 decades. So, where is price tag per TB?

Awesome, that is really cool even if I love my M.2 NVMe's and SSD's. Got to say that is pretty epic hard drive tech, crazy.

Too much moving parts for my preference.

Very much needed ! Even at QLC, SSD's still won't touch HDD capacities and price/GB anytime soon. And that is before HAMR! And yes, there may be lots of moving parts, but it really doesn't matter if they can move reliably. Strangely, most of the failures in HDD's aren't the moving parts, but the electronics driving those movements... It was about time to increase HDD speeds ! Can't wait to have some of these new Hydra-Disk-Drives in my video workstation, and copy those huge 4K video files twice or three times as fast.

sverek:

Too much moving parts for my preference.

Are you 12? HDD's have been the working horses for decades. True, tech moves forward and with it new and better hardware emerges, but still. HDD are still the best cost/capacity in relation to SSD cost/speed. We are in a transition faze, it will take another 10 years to (maybe) start using HDD less. Some companies still use tape recorders due to cost/density reasons.

Silva:

Are you 12?

That's deep.

Silva:

Are you 12? HDD's have been the working horses for decades. True, tech moves forward and with it new and better hardware emerges, but still. HDD are still the best cost/capacity in relation to SSD cost/speed. We are in a transition faze, it will take another 10 years to (maybe) start using HDD less. Some companies still use tape recorders due to cost/density reasons.

for hdd, head/actuator crash(failure) is one common thing that causing hdd failure this new hdd using multi(dual) actuator, while they might change something but it also not proved it going to be more reliable whatsoever if basically they only add more actuator and not changing the rest, then more actuator can increase failure rate

Soon we will need to see SATA 4, or beyond, as I am assuming this testing may be bottlenecked by SATA 3--or, maybe not. Trying to put these puppies in a 2-3 drive RAID 0 config should be interesting. Hope it pans out--to stay relevant in performance terms with .M2 and 2.5" SSDs they are going to have to make the economics right...! Nothing drives innovation like competition, eh?

I would of preferred to make the HDD same width but bit taller and add a full head on opposite corner that reads all the platters at once, so that will quadruple the speeds, instead of two heads like now that each have half the platters, they will have full head set, and each will read all platters at once, and will be spread by doing 50% of the platter each, so they will do twice the data and half the movement. And it can go even faster, if they utilize this technology they used now, so two full heads on opposite side, each head split into 2 moving separately like now

As long as there is a 5 year warranty then what's the problem. Need to just make them 300mb/s plus and they'll be golden at a decent price point.

I still don't understand how this fast HDD benefit mere consumers. As far as you have SSD for OS and programs, you don't need fast drive for data (movies, music, etc...) This could be good for data centers, since those probably can store lots of data and still access it fast. Consumers don't need 10TB fast HDD. 512GB ssd for OS, games and programs is usually enough.

I was an SSD holdout for a long time, as I was turned off by their cost per GB ratio and I had my trusty WD Raptors in RAID 0. Now I have a Samsung 960 Pro and a 850 Pro, and there's no way in hell I would ever go back to using HDDs!

Say what you want but fundamental or disruptive innovations in a mature product (like HD), is almost unheard of. This is F***** IMPRESSIVE

maybe I will get one these to replace my old barracuda drive, if the price is still the price of hdd per 1b

sverek:

I still don't understand how this fast HDD benefit mere consumers. As far as you have SSD for OS and programs, you don't need fast drive for data (movies, music, etc...) This could be good for data centers, since those probably can store lots of data and still access it fast. Consumers don't need 10TB fast HDD. 512GB ssd for OS, games and programs is usually enough.

Its not just about speed but as well reliability. Those recent 10-12GB helium sealed drives have much higher reliability as they are more or less copies of enterprise driver with few things disabled. Maybe not everyone needit, but you would be surprised how many people use them, especialy those working in IT. As for myself I have M.2 SSD for OS, 12TB for programs, 10TB for data, 3x 6TB for NAS/Data/Temp drives and sata SSD for few selected programs+data.

xrodney:

Its not just about speed but as well reliability. Those recent 10-12GB helium sealed drives have much higher reliability as they are more or less copies of enterprise driver with few things disabled. Maybe not everyone needit, but you would be surprised how many people use them, especialy those working in IT. As for myself I have M.2 SSD for OS, 12TB for programs, 10TB for data, 3x 6TB for NAS/Data/Temp drives and sata SSD for few selected programs+data.

Yes, you mention enterprise. I mentioned general consumers.

sverek:

I still don't understand how this fast HDD benefit mere consumers. As far as you have SSD for OS and programs, you don't need fast drive for data (movies, music, etc...) This could be good for data centers, since those probably can store lots of data and still access it fast. Consumers don't need 10TB fast HDD. 512GB ssd for OS, games and programs is usually enough.

I have a full 3Tb HDD and it takes allot to transfer all of its data to another drive, with both drives at max speed. More speed is always better, specially talking about 10TB drives! Just because you have a bunch of small files and don't have the need for speed, doesn't mean other people don't have hours of 4k movies that need to work on! SSD is still expensive and the reliability is going down faster over density with TLC and more recently QLC! So HDD will still be a relevant tech to improve on for the next 10 years.

Cameras capable of filming 100-150mbps 4K video can be had for as low as 350$ (Panasonic G7) 1 minute of 4K video (@100mbps) = 750MiB 1 hour of same 4K video = 44 GB Let's assume a work day for someone who is in video production is 4-5 hours of video during usable daylight (from which a lot will be thrown away, but it still needs to be stored before editing). That is already 220 GB of raw video for one single day of work. If you go more high-end an get Panasonic GH5, that one is capable of 400mbps video (for better quality and 10-bit HDR encoding), so same work day can be 1 TB filmed... IN ONE DAY. Not even talking about really professional quality video... ... and look at Youtube ! So many channels, so many producers. (Then there's everyone making video for direct commercial purposes, product video, wedding video, music video, documentaries, porn, you name it !) And nobody erases their video for a long long time, as you never know when you need a few seconds of some video to be edited in something else ! Archive keeps growing and growing... The tini-tiny SSD's have no chance when you talk about this kind of work. Unless SSD's drop in price/GB 5 times and grow in capacities also 5 times, they will not displace high-capacity HDD's any single bit. p.s. - There's a lot more areas where lots of storage is needed, not just video. That was just the example.

Reddoguk:

As long as there is a 5 year warranty then what's the problem. Need to just make them 300mb/s plus and they'll be golden at a decent price point.

You never lost 2 or 3 years worth of data have you? What does downtime and rma's cost your business? Warranties are good tried and tested tech is better still.