Slashdot Mirror


Seagate Announces First 1.5TB Desktop Hard Drive

MojoKid writes "Seagate announced three new consumer-level hard drives today, which it claims are the 'industry's first 1.5-terabyte desktop and half-terabyte notebook hard drives.' The company claims that it is able to greatly increase the areal density of its drive substrates by utilizing perpendicular magnetic recording (PMR) technology that is capable of delivering more than triple the storage density of traditional longitudinal recording. Seagate's latest desktop-class hard drive, the Barracuda 7200.11, will be available in a 1.5TB capacity starting in August. The 3.5-inch drive is made up of four 375GB platters and has a 7,200-rpm rotational speed."

11 of 383 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Without increasing rotational speed & seek by crow · · Score: 3, Informative

    Seek time and rotational speed are mostly independent.

    Seek time is the time that it takes to move the head to the desired track (including time for the vibrations from the movement to settle down). This is mostly independent of how fast the disk is spinning.

    Rotational speed determines how long you have to wait, on average, for the data you want to read to show up under the head.

    So a random read will take one seek, plus half a rotation, before the drive can read the data.

  2. Re:4 platters by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Informative

    Copy the following into your URL bar and press Enter. The code will allow you to compute the real amount.

    javascript:var capacity=window.prompt("Enter the capacity in TB.");capacity=capacity*0.9094947;alert("Real capacity is "+capacity+"TB");

  3. Warranty by Dracker · · Score: 4, Informative

    Actually, Seagate offers a 5-year warranty on their hard drives. It's a major reason why I usually buy from Seagate instead of going to Western Digital or Samsung, which usually only a offer 3-year warranty. Still, it's always best to keep backups. How nice the company is about replacements says nothing about how likely the drive is to fail.

  4. Re:What I really want... by CopaceticOpus · · Score: 4, Informative

    Any data you truly care about needs to be on at least three devices, which are in at least two different buildings. Increasing the reliability of current drives won't be as helpful as bringing down prices so that multiple copies are more affordable. No amount of reliability will account for theft, fire, and human error.

    I use a set of three hard drives. One internal drive is in primary use. I back that up to an external drive frequently. Every couple weeks or so, I take that external drive to my remote location and swap it with another external drive, which then becomes my local backup.

    All copying is done with rsync to minimize drive wear and copy times. I just plug in the drive and run a batch file.

  5. Re:that's a lot by geekoid · · Score: 3, Informative

    "You must be joking."

    Gee, you think?

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  6. poor math by dj245 · · Score: 4, Informative

    My math is crummy today. Its 426 minutes which is over 7 hours. But still quite a long time considering.

    --
    Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
  7. Re:Slow drives by BrentH · · Score: 3, Informative

    As the bits are more densly packed on the platters, the thoughput is increasing too. Current drives easily doo 100MB/s and I would be surprised if this drive can do 120-140MB/s. You're point still stands of course, HD space increases faster than throughputs increase.

  8. Re:Moar datas plz! by Jherek+Carnelian · · Score: 4, Informative

    Do you have a favorite piece(s) of software for doing all this?

    eac3to + various filters (some commercial, it comes with the Free ones) to take it apart and
    mkvmerge to put it together as a matroska file (mkvmerge is part of mkvtoolnix)
    one caveat is that mkvmerge can not handle dts files more complex than the regular DTS format on dvds, but it can do truehd. I always recompress to flac anyway, tends to be more efficient than either truehd or dts master audio and eac3to can do the recompression automatically.

    If you want to keep it in m2ts format than TsRemuxer is pretty good it will allow you to remux to either a single m2ts file or to a bare-bones blu-ray directory format.

    All above mentioned tools are easy to find in google.

  9. Re:Slow drives by proxima · · Score: 3, Informative

    Current drives easily doo 100MB/s and I would be surprised if this drive can do 120-140MB/s.

    Got a source for that? I've just installed two Seagate SATA 750G drives with 16 MB of cache each in a mirrored config, and I get sustained read performance in the neighborhood of 60-65 MB/s. And mirroring should speed up read performance relative to a single drive. Write performance is about 25 MB/s (tested using bonnie++). These numbers are a significant improvement over the PATA 200G and 120G drives that they replaced, but not matching the relative increase in capacity (nearly 4x).

    This article is about a year old, but none of the drives listed give you throughput greater than 100 MB/s. And that list includes 10k RPM drives.

    --
    "The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent." --Carl Sagan
  10. Re:Slow drives by jriskin · · Score: 5, Informative

    Good Source is Storage Review
    http://www.storagereview.com/php/benchmark/bench_sort.php

    The top 34 drives all do at least 54mb/sec MINIMUM and at least ~80MB/sec maximum. The top 15kRPM cheetah doing 82.7-135MB/sec.

    If i were to pull a number out of my ass I would say 78-135MB/sec (min/max) on the new 1.5TB drives.

    I would say if you have 750gig seagates and you are only getting 25MB/sec you have a bottleneck. Those drives should do a MINIMUM of at least 40MB/sec...