• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

more 2tb drives?

D

DReborn

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 11, 2004
Messages
364
i've outgrown my 1tb drive in my computer and was thinking about upgrading to a 1.5tb or a 2tb but the current 2tb are pretty slow (i have the WD 2tb in my NAS and it's fine for backing up but not as a main data storage drive in a main desktop, IMHO).

I'd hate to snap up a 1.5tb seagate that's been out for what seems like forever if a new 2tb is coming down the pike. anybody know?

thanks
 
Why is the 2TB slow as a storage drive? Even if you transfer 4-5GB files routinely that can't take more than 2 minutes to transfer and you probably have better things to do than stare at the data transfer screen.
 
I don't have any speed issues with the WD 2TB, access time is a little meh but sustained transfers are fine.
 
Even at 5400RPM, a 2TB drive will saturate Gigabit Ethernet. I know you're asking about a drive for installation within your system, but the current WD 2TB gives plenty of throughput for disk-to-disk backup applications. It will falter in random access performance, but you'd choose a 7200RPM drive there anyway.

Seagate has a 5900RPM 2TB drive from the 'Cuda LP series. Hitachi still tops out at 1TB, and Samsung peaks at 1.5TB. If I had to guess, I'd say that Hitachi is the next to make a move to 2TB. It has been some time since a new Kurofune 5 platter drive has launched.
 
i use my current 1tb drive as my downloads and media drive so i access it fairly frequently. small, medium, big files...everything. I might just have to leave my current 1tb drive in for mydocuments/music/photos and get a current 1.5tb drive just for the movies. unfortunately that's only about 500gb of more usable space than a 2tb...just rather have less drives in my system.

i;ll need to get an internal raid card for more sata ports.
 
2TB drive should be FASTER than a 1TB drive. Higher data density = faster... (Sequential read/write, seek times should be very similar)


Why do people have this weird misconception that bigger drives are slow?
 
DReborn said:
i've outgrown my 1tb drive in my computer and was thinking about upgrading to a 1.5tb or a 2tb but the current 2tb are pretty slow (i have the WD 2tb in my NAS and it's fine for backing up but not as a main data storage drive in a main desktop, IMHO).

I'd hate to snap up a 1.5tb seagate that's been out for what seems like forever if a new 2tb is coming down the pike. anybody know?

thanks
Click to expand...

I'm thinking it's your NAS that is slow, not the drives.
 
extide said:
2TB drive should be FASTER than a 1TB drive. Higher data density = faster... (Sequential read/write, seek times should be very similar)


Why do people have this weird misconception that bigger drives are slow?
Click to expand...

more data= harder to look through logic?
 
extide said:
2TB drive should be FASTER than a 1TB drive. Higher data density = faster... (Sequential read/write, seek times should be very similar)


Why do people have this weird misconception that bigger drives are slow?
Click to expand...

although i agree that higher density==faster performance, there is a current max density, its the number of platters they have been increasing recently. more platters doesnt necessarily make a faster drive since the seeker head can only be in one place at any given moment.
 
well first off my NAS, the Thecus N3200 Pro, is pretty darn speedy being in pretty much the top 10 in speed tests (http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com_nas/Itemid,190/) and my point was obviously that some drives are faster than others. My 150gb raptor is faster than a 5900rpm green 2tb drive in probably every single valuable test.

The one thing about the green drives is that they like to go to sleep so it takes a few seconds to wake them up, that's pretty annoying if you're trying to open up a music file or photo instantly.

it's more the random access speed that scares me off the current 2tb drives...im sure they are all fine for archiving/storage purposes but for a drive that gets accesses 100% i am using the computer, i personally don't think it's a good fit.

but of course, i'd love to be shown wrong...id rather have the 2tb drive than a 1tb and a 1.5tb
 
i wonder, has anyone short stroked a 2TB drive to say 500GB and see how fast it performs?
I wonder where will the scores start dropping.

I presume that the data is distributed equally on all platters if you short stroke it like that. so a quarter of the platter will be used, on all platters.
 
aggiestudd07 said:
although i agree that higher density==faster performance, there is a current max density, its the number of platters they have been increasing recently. more platters doesnt necessarily make a faster drive since the seeker head can only be in one place at any given moment.
Click to expand...



More platters = higher density. Think of the total amount of data passing under all the heads on one rotation. With two platters that's twice as much data as a single platter, all else being the same.

Also, imagine a platter with twice as much data density as another, this is the same thing, twice as much data passes under the heads on one revolution than a platter with half the density of the first one.

Sequential speeds go up, seek times stay about the same.

**The only thing is right now I believe that the only 2TB drive out is the WD Caviar Green edition, which obviously would be slower than a 1TB black edition.
***EDIT: Actually Seagate has one too, but it appears to be 5900 rpm (weird number?) so it would also be slower than a 7200rpm drive.


Megalomaniac said:
I presume that the data is distributed equally on all platters if you short stroke it like that. so a quarter of the platter will be used, on all platters.
Click to expand...

This is true
 
Jospeh said:
more data= harder to look through logic?
Click to expand...

Dude, I spilled my milk..
signature_distory.jpg


Thanks for the lol
 
IIRC there's also an enterprise version of (RE4) of WD's 2 TB drive. I don't know if it's commercially released yet.

Most hard drive mfg's will be 2 TB by the end of the year, trust me ;)
 
If you're looking for desktop random access performance (bootup, loading programs, installing stuff, loading games, etc) either the 1.5TB Seagate or a 1TB 7200RPM drive is a better choice. If all you'll be doing is shoveling large files back and forth, pick up the WD 2TB and don't worry about it.
 
pgjensen said:
i got 1000MB/sec read from 14 2tb drives in raid0. i think they're fine :)
Click to expand...

You'll be :( when one of the disks in that array inevitably fails. :)

I'm sure it's just a test setup, what RAID controller are you using? Areca with 2GB of cache?
 
veritas7 said:
IIRC there's also an enterprise version of (RE4) of WD's 2 TB drive. I don't know if it's commercially released yet.

Most hard drive mfg's will be 2 TB by the end of the year, trust me ;)
Click to expand...
I'd like to know if RE4s are commercially available too. It seems as though it was but I don't see any in the channel. One of the bigger distributors/resellers said back in the middle of May that I could get them in a week, and two weeks later still nothing.

As far as I can see, no reseller has the drives in stock.
 
I'd like to know if RE4s are commercially available too. It seems as though it was but I don't see any in the channel. One of the bigger distributors/resellers said back in the middle of May that I could get them in a week, and two weeks later still nothing.

As far as I can see, no reseller has the drives in stock.
Click to expand...
Areca is testing them now, so WD must have sent them 24 or so. I assume they're spreading now slowly.




You'll be when one of the disks in that array inevitably fails.

I'm sure it's just a test setup, what RAID controller are you using? Areca with 2GB of cache?
Click to expand...
just a test setup to ensure the drives worked with that card.

areca 1680ix-24 with 2gb cache.

i'll have 16 drives in raid6 setup tomorrow and 20 within a couple weeks - waiting to find more at $170 like i did. may have a hot spare, though i haven't decided yet.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top