Samsung Reaches 1TB Per Disk Platter

LOCO LAPTOP said:
5,400 RPM. ew.
Click to expand...

Lets see, my 2TB Samsung 5400RPM gets 130MB/s

Given that there is a much increased density on the future 4TB disks we can assume around 150MB/s probably.

This is a mass drive for storage. Why would you be installing an operating system on a 4TB drive is beyond me.

If you have TB of data on one drive for storage would you really want a 7200rpm drive that is going to be less reliable and wear out faster?

It's a simple truth that something that has to spin faster is going to wear out faster and get hotter, etc.

I would rather have a magnetic drive that spins even slower (for even longer life and reliability) considering I have them in a RAID array which increases their throughput across a stripe. It's a network storage device so i'm already limited to 125MB/s gigabit anyways.
 
Going to get one. 5400rpm is fine for streams and media storage and all that. Don't need a blazing fast hard drive for storage means. The bigger the better. The more the merrier.
 
Conker said:
Going to get one. 5400rpm is fine for streams and media storage and all that. Don't need a blazing fast hard drive for storage means. The bigger the better. The more the merrier.
Click to expand...

Given the density, even 2800 RPM would be fine for streams and media storage... That's still approx 70MB/sec. (Assuming half the rotation speed = half the throughput)

Which is exactly what my blazing fast Seagate Barracuda 7200 RPM 500GB drive here does.

People who go "5400RPM! EWW!" need a punch in the left nut.
 
yeah dummies. rpm doesn't matter so much anymore with such a high platter density
 
but damn, they need to make these drives more reliable.

no one wants to lose 4 gigs of porn and warez all in one pop.
 
dr.kevin said:
but damn, they need to make these drives more reliable.

no one wants to lose 4 gigs of porn and warez all in one pop.
Click to expand...

Whenever I have a large amounts of data I don't want destroyed, I either do RAID-1 (or a 1:1 backup) with two separate drives, or a RAID-5.

If you're going to buy a 4TB drive, and you have critical data, you buy two 4TB drives expecting only 4TB of data, but redundant.
 
techrat said:
Given the density, even 2800 RPM would be fine for streams and media storage... That's still approx 70MB/sec. (Assuming half the rotation speed = half the throughput)

Which is exactly what my blazing fast Seagate Barracuda 7200 RPM 500GB drive here does.

People who go "5400RPM! EWW!" need a punch in the left nut.
Click to expand...

You apparently don't spend all day trying to dump data off 5400rpm drives like I do. They quickly turn an hour job into a 3 hour job and I am stuck only charging the hour due to flat rate bs.

Now granted the greater data density may negate this. I will have to wait and see raw numbers before making a final judgement. However at a glance 5400 rpm for 4tb to dump sounds like a nightmare.
 
I have to say I'm excited about these upcoming drives. Just a year ago I couldn't imagine filling more than a terabyte or two, but nowadays I'm praying for a revolutionary new storage technology that suddenly enables petabyte consumer drives. I guess 4TB drives will have to do in the meantime, but they're a nice step up from 2TB. ;)
 
Dekoth-E- said:
You apparently don't spend all day trying to dump data off 5400rpm drives like I do. They quickly turn an hour job into a 3 hour job and I am stuck only charging the hour due to flat rate bs.

Now granted the greater data density may negate this. I will have to wait and see raw numbers before making a final judgement. However at a glance 5400 rpm for 4tb to dump sounds like a nightmare.
Click to expand...

Do you really expect to transfer 1.1GB/second on a consumer drive today?

Sounds like time management is the problem here, not drive speed.
 
originally posted by Taco
I agree, I have a pair of SSD. However Steam is a pain in the ass, I hate the way it handles installs. I've read a lot of guides on how to get it to work across a couple drives, but they are major hack jobs.
Click to expand...
Wrong :D http://www.stefanjones.ca/steam/ <-Has worked just fine for me, Easy to use and fast!
enjoy
 
Spare-Flair said:
Fine for storage. We have SSDs now. I don't even care about 7200 or 10,000 RPM anymore.
Click to expand...

I'm with you just sold off my PC and gonna save till some new techonlogy comes (new intel's chip and P68 MB after reviews of course) might be easier to have those in there. i would like to have least 5900 RPM for little speed while in need.

i would like to have least one WD black as while burning DVD/CD with back up data it failes majority of time and i burn 1 TB data every 2 and half month and waste almost 20 DVD's on copying survillance disks at my work.

Time to build my first HTPC (with 2 of the 10 TB HD)
 
Dekoth-E- said:
You apparently don't spend all day trying to dump data off 5400rpm drives like I do. They quickly turn an hour job into a 3 hour job and I am stuck only charging the hour due to flat rate bs.

Now granted the greater data density may negate this. I will have to wait and see raw numbers before making a final judgement. However at a glance 5400 rpm for 4tb to dump sounds like a nightmare.
Click to expand...

My 5400 RPM 1TB drive here has higher throughput (more than double) than my 10,000 RPM 30GB drive.

Soooooooo...

Again, people who go "5400 rpm, EWWW!" need a punch in the left nut.
 
The lower power usage, longer life, and quieter operation of 5400 RPM drives make my HTPC pretty happy.

Plus, I don't even notice a difference with windows installed to one (over a 7200 RPM drive, that is).
 
Higher density does negate the need for higher RPMs for sequential IO, aka media. Even at a slower rotation, you lay down a lot more bits per rotation with the super high density.

However, higher density does not help with speeds for random IO. If you need to access a block that just passed the head, you still need to wait a full rotation to touch the next block. This rotation takes longer at lower RPMs...

This is why 15k rpm drives are used for databases in the enterprise (random IO) and why big slow SATA disks are fine for most enterprise file shares...
 
panfist said:
To all the people that are crapping on this product: it's not meant for performance, it's not meant for games, and I guess that means it's not meant for you guys. This is a product that's meant to maximize one spec at the expense of others in order to please people that care just about that one spec.

It would be like crapping in a thread about the AMD 6990 because you can't put it in silent, small-form-factor HTPC. Well...no shit...it's not meant for that. It's like complaining that you can't tow a yacht with a corvette, or that you can't beat a corvette in a race with your turbodiesel pickup.

I, for one, am excited that storage capacities are finally kicking up again. I remember reading in late 2009 that a company was expecting to have 10TB drives by 2011...It smells like someone extrapolated too far. Anyway, I am beginning to run out of storage space and adding more drives is not my preferred option. If hard disk capacity doesn't begin increasing again, I will probably have to buy one of those 4U 24 disk enclosures next year.
Click to expand...

I agree with everything with just said for the exact same reason, especially the 4U rack part.
 
People complaining of speed on the large drives are yes doing it wrong. I couldn't care that my large drives are 5400 rpm, in fact I would rather have them so because I want them quiet. They are meant for storage and backup while the main rig has SSD's and Raid 0 7200rpm HDD's. Who needs speed in storage? Then raid those babies like most people do.

Hurry up Samsung and release these badboys so I can buy a bunch of the 3TB drives for a hundred bucks a piece. :D
 
I generally don't care about the speed of the drive. 5400 rpm is good for movies / music. I'd be weary of putting anything I care about on a drive that size without an equal size backup. I've lost one to many home videos to hard drive crashes. (I was young and stupid about backups)
 
these are going to be for storage only. Nothing more. I dont see why people are making such a big deal over the 5400 RPM speeds. I want 4 of these guys..I can load `em up. :D
 
Spare-Flair said:
Fine for storage. We have SSDs now. I don't even care about 7200 or 10,000 RPM anymore.
Click to expand...


You find me a 4TB SSD for less than a 128GB SSD, and I'll be your friend for life, until then platter drives will be the main storage media, SSD is purely for the OS right now.
 
DogChainX said:
Whenever I have a large amounts of data I don't want destroyed, I either do RAID-1 (or a 1:1 backup) with two separate drives, or a RAID-5.

If you're going to buy a 4TB drive, and you have critical data, you buy two 4TB drives expecting only 4TB of data, but redundant.
Click to expand...

Or, even better if your data doesn't change much, and it's not critical that it be up 24/7, just keep a off-site backup.

I'm currently using 1 USB 3.0 dock and 2TB WD green drive for my off-site backup. Image the OS drive, and copy the rest of the files. Even if my home systems are loss or destroyed, I still have my data, including pictures, videos, etc.
 
I say have one in your system as a mirror of your main fast drives, one external out of your system as a backup, then a backup of the backup kept offsite. So essentially it would be 3 backups, but 4 full copies of your data, with 1 of the backups in real time, while the other two are safe and controlled.
 
Dekoth-E- said:
People seem to be forgetting two very important things;

1) Speed affects how quickly you get data on and swap it around. So even as a pure storage drive, 5400 RPM is pretty bleak.

2) At some point all that data has to come off...4TB@5400 rpm? No Thank You.

I am glad they hit the 1TB per platter milestone, I am unhappy they are only offering 5400rpm. The least they could do is offer 5400rpm, 7200rpm and 10k variants so people can pick what they want.
Click to expand...

Hmm, counter-point to 2) Movie and music storage. Even high definition movies uncompressed in 1080p only require at most 15Mbps which is easily sustainable with 5400 RPM, mp3s, etc. Potentailly, I could steam music to 100 devices in my household in real-time or dvds to 5 in real-time, etc etc assuming enough network bandwidth and have a collection of 4TB worth of songs/movies which is A LOT.
 
One thing that scares me about higher and higher densities is sector reliability goes down. There is more chance to get bad sectors with more density, which really sucks =(.

Also they have to pad the sectors with more ECC code in case of sector read issues.

In my line of work, performing a sector level data recovery on massive HDD's takes FOREVER!

People sometimes cant understand why a HUGE HDD that has bad sectors sometimes takes 2 - 3 weeks of recovery time, in an attempt to just get anything from it.

Also, SSD's in my experience completely suck, Ive dealt with several SSD's now that have developed bad cells, they cause reliability issues in RAID1's. They are just horrible, fast but horrible.

So either way, the integrity of data gets lower and lower and technology advances, which kinda sucks =(.

But, its good on one hand because, storage is getting so cheap so its hella easy to grab 2x2tb drives and put them in a RAID1 or 4 of them for a RAID 10 if you want speed and redundancy.
But, sometimes thats not even worth it unless you run nice hardware RAID controllers, because onboard motherboard software controllers suck balls PERIOD.
 
techrat said:
a 2TB 5400 RPM with 500GB per side of each platter density... (1TB per platter)

Versus

a 2TB 7200 RPM with 250GB per side of each platter density... (500GB per platter)

I'll take the former, any day. Due to density, it would pass more bits in each rotation than 7200 RPM.

Of all places that would make the mistake of simply looking at one spec value and condemning the entire product for it, I didn't think people here would be so quick to make that mistake.
Click to expand...

I'm surprised that it took until the second page until someone pointed that out.. what's happening to my favorite forum?! :p
 
techrat said:
a 2TB 5400 RPM with 500GB per side of each platter density... (1TB per platter)

Versus

a 2TB 7200 RPM with 250GB per side of each platter density... (500GB per platter)

I'll take the former, any day. Due to density, it would pass more bits in each rotation than 7200 RPM.

Of all places that would make the mistake of simply looking at one spec value and condemning the entire product for it, I didn't think people here would be so quick to make that mistake.
Click to expand...

7200 rpm: 80-100 IOPS

Versus

5400 rpm: 50-80 IOPS


I'll take the former, any day.
 
Sequential read speeds at 5400 rpm at that density are likely just fine for the large file sizes typically found in media storage. I'll take five in raid 5 for my nas please.
 
I just want to know the price because if they are like the 3tb drives you can get 2 2tb for the price of one 3tb making it dumb to get one unless you need 3tb in one drive only.
 
LightningCrash said:
Nope, nobody has gotten 60K out of it.

DDRdrive X1 - 211,299 RW IOPS

In any case, I'm sure you understand why your point was not germane to the discussion.
Click to expand...

When you consider the lowest figure thrown about for SSDs... 20,000...

The difference between 5400 and 7200 RPM becomes even smaller.

LightningCrash said:
7200 rpm: 80-100 IOPS
Versus
5400 rpm: 50-80 IOPS
I'll take the former, any day.
Click to expand...

Percentage of IOPS compared to SSD:

5400 rpm 0.0025 to 0.004%

7200 rpm 0.004 to 0.005%

So.

If IOPS are THAT critical...

You won't be using a platter drive anyway.
 
What is the dealio?

You guys make it sound like Samsung 5400rpm drives are ungodly slow.

My 2TB Samsung 2TB 5400rpm drives are almost just as fast (or maybe faster) as my 1TB WD Black drives.
 
DTN107 said:
What is the dealio?

You guys make it sound like Samsung 5400rpm drives are ungodly slow.

My 2TB Samsung 2TB 5400rpm drives are almost just as fast (or maybe faster) as my 1TB WD Black drives.
Click to expand...

those people are just misinformed....
as density increases, read/write speed increases as well, so 5400rpm will be plenty fast.
and since a 4TB is meant for storage, you dont need super performance... so unless you are tranferring files between an SSD or RAID0 array, there will be no noticeable slowdowns.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top