Toshiba will release 14 TB HDD helium filled this year

Ricepudding

2017-09-05 19:07

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!

#5469545

Stairmand

2017-09-05 21:28

Great they are still increasing capacity, but (I suspect due to low demand) drive prices above 6TB are still stubbornly high.

#5469547

Reddoguk

2017-09-05 21:32

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.

#5469580

rl66

2017-09-06 00:45

Stairmand:

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

Ricepudding:

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)

#5469632

CitizenZero

2017-09-06 06:21

Ricepudding:

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 😉

#5469637

JonasBeckman

2017-09-06 07:08

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...)

#5469648

allesclar

2017-09-06 07:59

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.

#5469649

allesclar

2017-09-06 08:01

CitizenZero:

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?

#5469650

allesclar

2017-09-06 08:02

rl66:

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.

#5469668

Ricepudding

2017-09-06 11:06

CitizenZero:

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 😀

allesclar:

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.

#5469749

holystarlight

2017-09-06 16:31

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.

#5469753

allesclar

2017-09-06 16:43

Ricepudding:

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.

#5469845

Clawedge

2017-09-07 02:46

i am curious about platter density, is it shingled or perpendicular?

#5469923

Ricepudding

2017-09-07 11:19

allesclar:

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