Slashdot Mirror
Five Years of PC Storage Performance Compared
theraindog writes "PC storage has come a long way in the last few years. Perpendicular recording tech has fueled climbing capacities, 10k-RPM spindle speeds have migrated from SCSI to Serial ATA, Native Command Queuing has made mechanical drives smarter, and a burgeoning SSD market looks set to fundamentally change the industry. The Tech Report has taken a look back at the last four and a half years of PC storage solutions, probing the capacity and performance of a whopping 70 different notebook and desktop hard drives, SSDs, and exotic RAM disks. There's a lot of test data to digest, but the overall trends are easy to spot, potentially foretelling the future of PC storage."
The current models don't spin very quickly, but in the future people will pay a premium for the increased throughput in 5000, 7500, and 10K RPM models.
It is said that pr0n drives certain sectors of technology. Unfortunately, I have yet to find a single drive to store my whole collection... :-(
The overall trend on one page instead of 12 is that storage is getting cheaper, bigger and faster. Oh boy...
A Magic the Gathering Article and Forum Aggregator
12 pages? Yeah, I want to read that. 12 pages of ads.
It's amazing what feats we have accomplished over the past five years. I really makes you wonder what storage technology we will have 50 years from now. I honestly can't wait to give my "in my day" speech to all the youngins when I'm 76.
"In my day, all our data was mostly stored on spinning magnetic disks... or platters as we used to call them..."
summary - intel x25 is super fast, super expensive. not much has changed with spinning platters.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
Looks like slashdot is on its high horse, saying "of course SSDs are faster, duh, what a waste of time!".
And yet if somebody had written that in a blog, everybody would merrily trolling about how "anecdotal evidence is irrelevant, BTW my HDD is teh fastest".
I don't understand it. Somebody goes to the trouble of comparing a shit-load of drives in a variety of tests, and apparently the results are boring/irrelevant.
Slashdotters are always bitching about lack of empirical evidence for claims, yet when an article come along with abundant information to back up its conclusions, it dosn't get any credit.
I know I'm probably rare, but I have yet to have one die that I actually purchased, I have thrown out 2 that likely would have, but not because they were failing, simply because by 2002 I had no use for a 600MB and 1GB drive, I've got a 1.6GB Western Digital from 1996, that still runs fine, although I only use it rarely as a sort of exaggerated floppy between PC's with no NIC. One 60GB (Maxtor, 2001), and two 80 GB's (Maxtor, 2002) still running fine in their respective boxes (an HP, and a Compaq), and two 120GB (Seagate) from 2003 still running fine on my primary computer, along with a 320GB (Seagate, SATA) in 2007, and another in 2008.
However, I have had 3 die that I got from adopting other peoples PC's, one being some no-name 2GB, a 40GB Quantum, and a Fujitsu/Samsung or something 30GB laptop drive. So maybe just sticking with the Seagate/Maxtor lineage has served me well.
If you're doing it right, it shouldn't be a big deal if the disk dies. If you have an internet connection, it should be trivial to ensure that you have your data backed up in multiple places that are widely distributed geographically. I've had drives die, disasters take out all of my hardware. I've never lost data.
Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
If you have an internet connection, it should be trivial to ensure that you have your data backed up in multiple places that are widely distributed geographically.
common problem with the world is that everybody assumes everybody else has the same needs as yourself. yes, internet backup might be trivial for your couple of dozen word files (although privacy is not included in the discussion here), but i have currently about 8TB of data spread over at least 15 drives here at my place.
please explain me again how it is trivial to have that backed up at multiple locations?
I think you didn't notice that the reason Anand's writeup is so useful is that he exposed the major performance degradation present in every SSD as it gets filled with data and begins to need to overwrite old data that was marked as deleted. I may be misunderstanding you, though, since your writing is incoherent.
Also, I've read Anandtech since 1997, so I'm pretty sure you didn't, as you say (with incorrect spelling, which is surprising from a journalist such as yourself) write these reviews "FAR IN ADVANCE OF ANANDTECH POSSIBLY EVEN BEING IN EXISTENCE."
"Everything published here isn't new, and has been known for a long time" - by blahplusplus (757119) on Saturday July 11, @09:23PM (#28664715)
And, I wrote about the effectiveness of Ramdisks in general + their potential for performance gain (software based ones @ FIRST), way, Way, WAY back, & in a respected publication no less, in Windows NT Magazine (now Windows IT Pro) April 1997 "BACK OFFICE PERFORMANCE" issue, page 61...
(& when it was applied practically? It took that same tech & company (EEC Systems/SuperSpeed.com) to Ms-Tech Ed 2 yrs. in a row, in its hardest category, SQLServer Performance Enhancement, 2 yrs. in a ROW as a finalist no less)
Later on, circa 2002-2003, for SSD's?
I did a review that was featured on the FRONT PAGE of CENATEK's website with analysis much like the ones I did here (& was ODDLY "modded down for" here -> http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1299731&cid=28664527 )
"and has been written about better by anand." - by blahplusplus (757119) on Saturday July 11, @09:23PM (#28664715)
Then, I will say the same as YOU have, in regards to ANAND La Shimpi: He only "bit off my style", in doing HIS write ups... how's that? Don't LIKE IT?? See the above, write the sources noted even (CENATEK or EEC Systems/SuperSpeed.com, to verify my statements).
APK
P.S.=> On the "mod-down"? Hey - That's ok too, as I have my share of troll stalkers here, (sort of an online psycho fanclub, lol)) that "gets off" on trying to put me down any chance they get & I know who they are even... & on said reviews? They were done, on MY part, FAR before Anandtech EVER did them, so as you said? Don't think TOO HIGHLY of anandtech's work... it was proceeded by myself FAR IN ADVANCE OF ANANDTECH POSSIBLY EVEN BEING IN EXISTENCE... apk
"I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
The format of those charts is retarded. They should have time on the x axis and whatever metric in log scale on the y axis. I couldn't care less which drive from 2005 is linked to a specific data point. I just want to see the trends as a function of time. In the later charts, with apparently fully exponential trends, you can't see whats going on at all.
You are pretty lucky. I've had quite a few drives fail over time, some containing very irreplaceable data, but such is life. I just recently lost the logic board an an 80gig drive. It contained 6 months worth of work on it that I was meaning to back up again, but never got around to. I think I can fix it, but maybe I can't, so it may just come as a lesson learned. Anymore if a drive lasts beyond a few months it might be ok for some time, but you should probably worry about it after a year or so. However, you still really need some sort of backup plan as even a good power surge will likely fry your drive and its data. I like external usb drives because, while pretty slow, they can be unplugged and thrown in a closet or something and will generally last for some time due to their infrequent use. Drives can sometimes survive fires as well, that is unless your house becomes a pile of smoldering toothpicks. Off site is always the way to go, but not everyone has that luxury. A good idea might be to leave a usb drive at mom's with your most important data or some sort of remote storage.
zosxavius photography
10k- and 15k-RPM spindle speeds have migrated from SCSI to Serial Attached SCSI and SATA, and ~5k- and 7k-RPM speeds have migrated from PATA to SATA
FTFY.
not only is time travel possible, it's irrelevant.
1) Rar it up
2) rename it to "world's best porn collection"
3) Bittorrent
I suspect you may be able to skip step two
Interesting that there appear to be no subjective or objective noise measurements (I did not read the entire article, as some moron has seen fit to split it across twelve pages). I remember when 7200 rpm drives first came out, they were aimed at the server market and a RAID array of them made the room sound like there was a generator running. The 7200 rpm drive in my recent iMac is whisper quiet by comparison.
I assume the newest 15,000 rpm drives are similarly noisy.
Sent from my iPhone
Get an account on rsync.net and have all of your 15 machines rsync their data there. Might take long the first time, but from there on it will just fly. You could even use a trivial cronjob to do it for you...
Best of all, rsync.net will let you access your data through WebDAVs, so it's like you can take your data with you anywhere you like, as long as you can get online somehow.
Get an account on rsync.net and have all of your 15 machines rsync their data there. Might take long the first time, but from there on it will just fly. You could even use a trivial cronjob to do it for you...
You must be joking! He has 8TB ! It would cost him $3840 PER MONTH to back up with rsync.net (yes, at the bulk discount rate). I'm sure you can fit a whole system with 8GB space in under $1000 if you go for the cheapest $/GB drives (probably 1.5 TB). Also you would fit most likely 4x2TB drives (only the drives) in $1000. With these numbers is very hard to see how you can do it yourself and NOT have huge savings compared to $3840 per month. Let's say each month you give one system (which is up-to-date) to a friend to keep it on his cable/DSL line. With $3840-$1000=$2840 available you are still ahead even if you use some monkey to install and configure everything at some ridiculous $250/hour (or pay yourself that amount). You would be still ahead if you would pay your friend a hefty one-time $500-$1000 for the privilege of keeping your system! And after you decide you have enough redundancy or you run out of friends everything is free! Or you can fedex every month a copy (=4-6 hdds) to somebody (encrypted if you like). It's just too easy...
That's weird, the only two drives I've ever had die on me were a Seagate (which is actually quite useful as a paperweight) and a Maxtor. Guess i got the duds that were meant for you...
Now Western Digital and Samsung on the other hand... the 80 gigger WDs I bought some time around 2002 (or was it 2003?) have been abused so badly (swapped in and out of cheap external cases, thrown into checked airline baggage without so much as anti-static wrap, dropped by idiot friends...) are still going strong as 2nd-and-3rd-in-line backups for the really important stuff (not pr0n :P).
I'm guessing there's enough horror stories about WD and Samsung out there too, though ;)
re:
For many slashdotters, that is not off-site storage. ;)
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
Is there any drive 750GB or higher in capacity that is reliable? Half the 750GB / 1TB drives I have bought in the past year or two have failed. I am currently pinning my hopes on the 1TB Green Samsung drive that I opted for because it runs slower & cooler. Anyone have a reliable higher capacity drive recommendation?
I come here for the love
that they are using an ancient system to do the tests? I wouldn't be surprised if the system itself is a limiting factor with some of the SSDs. Crazy.
Technophile
The three 15000 RPM SCSI 320 drives in my workstation (HP XW8400) are very quiet. This machine is amazingly quiet - HP engineers at a trade show say that was one of their design goals and they certainly achieved it.
Place nail here >+