sata300, 200gig, 10,000rpm . . May!!!

G

grdh20

Gawd
Joined
Feb 19, 2001
Messages
583
Seagate has already sent some samples out and the drives should be out around May.

They will be the first naitive sata2 300 speed drives and at a whopping 200 gigs at 10,000rpm's . . What's not to like? I just hope they aren't too expensive.

As an example, PC Power and Cooling has these sample drives that did a full windows install to the desktop in 6 minutes.
 
Thats impossible, an install isnt even that hd intensive ( talkin what, a gig?).
 
yea i agree i mean an os install is about a gig so if it was hd intensive any pc using sata-150 (150mbps) it would take a whopping 6.67 sec!!! lol. i dont believe it did it in six min
 
nightanole said:
Thats impossible, an install isnt even that hd intensive ( talkin what, a gig?).
Click to expand...
Oh yes it is. I read recently of a RAM drive that did a Windows XP install in less than five minutes. There has to be some sort of I/O bottleneck for that kind of speed to come from just the storage drive.

Still, to have a mechanical drive do that would mean that the drive was extremely specialized for the application, or some information was left out.

With regards to the thread topic, I wonder why Seagate didn't just pursue a Serial Attached SCSI drive right off the bat. I'm starting to get the feeling that Serial ATA II will get lost in the shuffle, but maybe I'm wrong.
 
hmm maybe it has its on data processor like scsi drives so it totally bypasses the cpu that would explain the quick install
 
How can you install Windows on a ram drive? Wouldn't everything be lost when you had to reboot during setup?

Lyquist
 
Lyquist said:
How can you install Windows on a ram drive? Wouldn't everything be lost when you had to reboot during setup?
Click to expand...
It's a hardware device with a battery backup to make it persistent. They're usually a pci card.
 
200GB 10K? WOW. I just want 7200RPM 500GB drives from seagate.
 
I just hope these drives have 16MB of cache and NCQ support... I will be very pleased then.
 
nightanole said:
Thats impossible, an install isnt even that hd intensive ( talkin what, a gig?).
Click to expand...

My roomate installed windows in just under 10 minutes with RAID'ed Raptors
 
They wont be 10k, you got your facts wrong. They would be cutting their own throats by undermining their lucrative, high margin SCSI segment by doing this. Unless you got a link this post is now considered FUD.
 
doormat said:
200GB 10K? WOW. I just want 7200RPM 500GB drives from seagate.
Click to expand...

200GB 10K!? WOW... you just took the words out of my mouth. isn't that even better than scsi? i would definately buy one.
 
killerD said:
They wont be 10k, you got your facts wrong. They would be cutting their own throats by undermining their lucrative, high margin SCSI segment by doing this. Unless you got a link this post is now considered FUD.
Click to expand...


I spoke with someone who had one in there hands testing it. He said it was 10k.
 
xonik said:
With regards to the thread topic, I wonder why Seagate didn't just pursue a Serial Attached SCSI drive right off the bat. I'm starting to get the feeling that Serial ATA II will get lost in the shuffle, but maybe I'm wrong.
Click to expand...


Seagate has right now both the 10k.7 and 15k.4 SAS drives just about ready for release.


As for this mysterious 200gb 10k I have not seen anything about it. My seagate contact mentioned that the 500gb nearline drives will shipping very soon like next month. No mention at all of a 10k SATA drive.

My job is to test hard disk compatability for a raid storeage manufacture who is a member of the seagate partner program. So generally I am in the know because of my job.

I call my contact at seagate tomorrow to see if there is any info about these.
 
I think he meant the SAS SCSI drives, who would be their target for a $500 200gb 10k SATA drive?
 
Tha_Bomb said:
me..
Click to expand...

If you're willing to spend that much on a drive, why not just get a SCSI or SAS one and spend a little more money on the controller. SCSI/SAS controllers have much lower CPU utilization that SATA controllers
 
It really wouldn't surprise me if seagate was planning a product to compete with the WD raptor. I highly doubt it will cost $500 if that it is the intended market. More like $250 if it is a 200gb drive. At that price point it is more reasonable then a raptor at least $/gig.


I email my seagate representative so we shall see what he has to say.
 
Will we see SAS on high end Pentium D / Nforce 4+ mobos this year? Or will it only be Server type stufff
 
draksia said:
It really wouldn't surprise me if seagate was planning a product to compete with the WD raptor.
Click to expand...
That's a really ironic statement, considering that the Raptor is WD's contender for the high-performance enterprise market, a market led by the likes of Seagate, Maxtor, and Fujitsu. The fact that many Raptor owners use it for desktop PCs doesn't change that.
 
xonik said:
That's a really ironic statement, considering that the Raptor is WD's contender for the high-performance enterprise market, a market led by the likes of Seagate, Maxtor, and Fujitsu. The fact that many Raptor owners use it for desktop PCs doesn't change that.
Click to expand...
...but it's still an ATA product, an as such it isn't truly an "Enterprise" drive. Low-to-midrange servers, sure. Buy 'em up. But for Enterprise-class applications, an ATA drive simply won't do. You'll need the speed and features of a real SCSI drive. Even if the SATA is simply a repackaged SCSI, the interface isn't up to par.
 
grdh20 said:
info was from Larry at PC Power and Cooling. Call him up and see what he says for yourself.
Click to expand...

And Butch at the local electronics chain told me that 2TB drives will be out in the next week

ok...dont mean to flame ya, but i need more to go on than "Larry told me so". Need documentation. If its one thing ive learned about the world in the past years, is in order to prove something, you need documents, lots and lots of documents.
 
Tha_Bomb said:
...but it's still an ATA product, an as such it isn't truly an "Enterprise" drive. Low-to-midrange servers, sure. Buy 'em up. But for Enterprise-class applications, an ATA drive simply won't do. You'll need the speed and features of a real SCSI drive. Even if the SATA is simply a repackaged SCSI, the interface isn't up to par.
Click to expand...


Exactly. It will never truly make it into enterprise level. People that want performance will just get a SCSI/Fibre/SAS drive. Those that need capacity will be looking for some thing larger then 74 gb.


WD IMO labels it an enterprise level to impress the high end euthisiast in which the raptor was done very well.

USMC2Hard4U: I highly doubt it. I doubt there is a enough market to justify the cost unless for some reason nVidia decides to implement on the south bridge. From what I am getting from the engineers at work the LSI SAS asic cost about $60 and that means about $100 jump in mainboard price to add SAS support.
 
draksia said:
USMC2Hard4U: I highly doubt it. I doubt there is a enough market to justify the cost unless for some reason nVidia decides to implement on the south bridge. From what I am getting from the engineers at work the LSI SAS asic cost about $60 and that means about $100 jump in mainboard price to add SAS support.
Click to expand...

That's right, it's mostly servers and high-end workstations that will have SAS embedded on the motherboard. Just like SCSI is right now. Lower end workstations usually have it available from the manufacturer as an option, but just use an add-in card instead of an embedded chip in that case.

However SAS chips have a much lower pin count than a parallel SCSI controller since you only need two pairs of wires (and ground) for each port instead of 68 wires. This will be even more improved with PCI-E SAS parts are out... (also, SAS parts generally require fewer external components since the bus is terminated inside the chip instead of using separate discrete terminators) So I could see SAS moving into lower-end workstations where SCSI wouldn't be, but most likely definitely not in the consumer desktip area.
 
draksia said:
Exactly. It will never truly make it into enterprise level. People that want performance will just get a SCSI/Fibre/SAS drive. Those that need capacity will be looking for some thing larger then 74 gb.


WD IMO labels it an enterprise level to impress the high end euthisiast in which the raptor was done very well.
Click to expand...
Exactly. And if you look at the testing done over at storage review, the raptor is not optimized for multi-user access paterns; it's in "desktop mode" like you can set many high-end SCSI drives to operate in.
 
UICompE02 said:
So I could see SAS moving into lower-end workstations where SCSI wouldn't be, but most likely definitely not in the consumer desktip area.
Click to expand...
Despite the significant additional cost, I could see SAS move into the enthusiast desktop area, unlike SCSI did. The reason is because there's backwards compatibility with SATA drives anyway, so it's not like there is a huge risk for the mainboard manufacturer to include a SAS ASIC on a high-end enthusiast board.
 
And would undercut their own enterprise business and give them margins razor thin, lol. Any profits made on consumer end on this super cheap / MB 10 K drive would be lost ten fold from IT managers abandoning their Cheetah drives and abandoning the SCSI market. This is a market that Seagate has pricing power over since WD (the low cost producer of drives) doesn't do SCSI. Now they could cripple multi user performance on their SATA drivesso they wouldnt hurt their own enterprise business? Sounds like a dumb idea to me too.

draksia said:
It really wouldn't surprise me if seagate was planning a product to compete with the WD raptor. I highly doubt it will cost $500 if that it is the intended market. More like $250 if it is a 200gb drive. At that price point it is more reasonable then a raptor at least $/gig.


I email my seagate representative so we shall see what he has to say.
Click to expand...
 
killerD said:
And would undercut their own enterprise business and give them margins razor thin, lol. Any profits made on consumer end on this super cheap / MB 10 K drive would be lost ten fold from IT managers abandoning their Cheetah drives and abandoning the SCSI market. This is a market that Seagate has pricing power over since WD (the low cost producer of drives) doesn't do SCSI. Now they could cripple multi user performance on their SATA drivesso they wouldnt hurt their own enterprise business? Sounds like a dumb idea to me too.
Click to expand...


It really wouldn't surprise me if they crippled the mutli-user performance because most manufactures already do that. They have horrible performance with write caching disabled. In most multi-disk multi-user raid setups write caching is disabled to prevent data lose. All current SATA drives perform horribily with no write caching where as most scsi/fibre drives handle it really well.

I really don't think it people will abonded with cheetahs in droves. They sure haven't for raptors and I don't see how a seagate version of the raptor would be all that more appealing to them.

We will have more definite answers when my seagate gets back to me.
 
10k rpm sata from seagate-->not gona happen.

my guess 147GB 10krpm SATA1/2 Western digital raptor, hopefully they call it something like T-REX. Also maybe 15k rpm or 300GB maybe just maybe?
 
draksia said:
I really don't think it people will abonded with cheetahs in droves. They sure haven't for raptors and I don't see how a seagate version of the raptor would be all that more appealing to them.
Click to expand...
Well, the lack of a SCSI Ultra-160/320 interface would be one big reason ;)

And to play the devil's advocate, I'd sure as hell trust a Seagate solution that's adapted from its SEVENTH generation than a second-generation Western Digital unit.
 
kleox64 said:
10k rpm sata from seagate-->not gona happen.

my guess 147GB 10krpm SATA1/2 Western digital raptor, hopefully they call it something like T-REX. Also maybe 15k rpm or 300GB maybe just maybe?
Click to expand...
Raptors are faster and more vicious than a T-REX:p
 
Octave said:
And Butch at the local electronics chain told me that 2TB drives will be out in the next week

ok...dont mean to flame ya, but i need more to go on than "Larry told me so". Need documentation. If its one thing ive learned about the world in the past years, is in order to prove something, you need documents, lots and lots of documents.
Click to expand...

This is a pre announced product (apparently under heavy NDA) that I happen to find out about while talking to the engineer at pcpc about my reseller account with them. I am not trying to prove anything to anyone. I thgought this forum would find this interesting. He described the drives that pcpc had been given to test out and suggested a May release. I thought it was great news so I posted it here. Take it however you want. PCPC has no reason to give me false information. The source of the info is the Vice President of Sales at PC Power and Cooling. It is easy to understand why Seagate may have issued them engineering samples of the drive, but believe what you want. In any case, I know what my next drives will be.

:rolleyes:
 
He suggested a release in May, how does he know that Seagate isn't just sending out the drives to test now for a 2006 release when their server drives improve?
 
serbiaNem said:
He suggested a release in May, how does he know that Seagate isn't just sending out the drives to test now for a 2006 release when their server drives improve?
Click to expand...


I guess they had some feedback from Seagate on this, but I guess anyhings possible. I would guess more like June anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top