Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Seagate launches sixth and last generation of 15K HDDs

  1. #1
    HEXUS.admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    31,709
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    2,073 times in 719 posts

    Seagate launches sixth and last generation of 15K HDDs

    Range of "World's Fastest Hard Drives" will not be further developed, as SSDs take over.
    Read more.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    ATLANTIS
    Posts
    1,207
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked
    28 times in 26 posts

    Re: Seagate launches sixth and last generation of 15K HDDs

    I see why its the last generation....315 to 215MB/s

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Wonderful Warwick!
    Posts
    3,919
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked
    183 times in 153 posts

    Re: Seagate launches sixth and last generation of 15K HDDs

    That's excellent for a mechanical drive though!
    Old puter - still good enuff till I save some pennies!

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Kingdom O Fife
    Posts
    288
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    15 times in 13 posts
    • zaph0d's system
      • Motherboard:
      • MSI X570-A Pro
      • CPU:
      • AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
      • Memory:
      • 48GB - 2X 32GB and 2X 16GB at 3200
      • Storage:
      • 480GB NVME (OS) 2TB 8 Drive sas Raid0 (Games)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Geforce 1070
      • PSU:
      • 1000W Coolermaster
      • Case:
      • Lian Li PC-343B (Original Model)
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • 2X 55" Samsung 4k tv's
      • Internet:
      • Virgin 500Mb

    Re: Seagate launches sixth and last generation of 15K HDDs

    But for the same price you could get at least half-a-dozen bigger consumer drives and put 'em in raid 0+1, get 15TB worth of raid0 at 500MB/s on the inside track and 750MB/s at the edge.

    This is what I use as a Main storage drive and as long as the game install is under 12GB I'll load it in ramdrive and play it from there with near zero loadtimes, if it's over 12GB I'll copy it to SSD and take the loadtime penalty whenever I want to play. At least until I double my Ram to 48GB that is

  5. #5
    Admin (Ret'd)
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    18,481
    Thanks
    1,016
    Thanked
    3,208 times in 2,281 posts

    Re: Seagate launches sixth and last generation of 15K HDDs

    Quote Originally Posted by zaph0d View Post
    But for the same price you could get at least half-a-dozen bigger consumer drives and put 'em in raid 0+1, get 15TB worth of raid0 at 500MB/s on the inside track and 750MB/s at the edge.

    This is what I use as a Main storage drive and as long as the game install is under 12GB I'll load it in ramdrive and play it from there with near zero loadtimes, if it's over 12GB I'll copy it to SSD and take the loadtime penalty whenever I want to play. At least until I double my Ram to 48GB that is
    Yes, but these are "Enterprise" SAS drives and to be fair, that's not exactly a typical SAS-based enterprise use you're putting them to. Price is not necessarily the prime, or even a high, criteria.

  6. #6
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    12,526
    Thanks
    736
    Thanked
    1,461 times in 1,231 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 32GB 3200MHz ECC
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Linux, 2TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 35 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Iiyama 27" 1440p
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: Seagate launches sixth and last generation of 15K HDDs

    Quote Originally Posted by zaph0d View Post
    But for the same price you could get at least half-a-dozen bigger consumer drives and put 'em in raid 0+1, get 15TB worth of raid0 at 500MB/s on the inside track and 750MB/s at the edge.
    These drives would usually be deployed by the tray-full, set up as raid 6 stripe sets. If you are reading from 20 drives at once then throughput isn't a problem, but latency still is and with a 15K drive you have half the average wait time for your sector to appear under the heads.

    However, with an SSD there is no rotational latency, which is why I struggle to see why there is still a market for these things.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Kingdom O Fife
    Posts
    288
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    15 times in 13 posts
    • zaph0d's system
      • Motherboard:
      • MSI X570-A Pro
      • CPU:
      • AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
      • Memory:
      • 48GB - 2X 32GB and 2X 16GB at 3200
      • Storage:
      • 480GB NVME (OS) 2TB 8 Drive sas Raid0 (Games)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Geforce 1070
      • PSU:
      • 1000W Coolermaster
      • Case:
      • Lian Li PC-343B (Original Model)
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • 2X 55" Samsung 4k tv's
      • Internet:
      • Virgin 500Mb

    Re: Seagate launches sixth and last generation of 15K HDDs

    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    However, with an SSD there is no rotational latency, which is why I struggle to see why there is still a market for these things.
    I think the only reason there's still a market is the fact that a dead SSD is completely dead and data is almost entirely unrecoverable, with mechanical drives the data can be recovered with a lot less difficulty & expence. Though as you say these drives are used in massively redundant arrays so the chance a drive would need to be recovered like that is remote.

  8. #8
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    12,526
    Thanks
    736
    Thanked
    1,461 times in 1,231 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 32GB 3200MHz ECC
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Linux, 2TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 35 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Iiyama 27" 1440p
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: Seagate launches sixth and last generation of 15K HDDs

    Quote Originally Posted by zaph0d View Post
    I think the only reason there's still a market is the fact that a dead SSD is completely dead and data is almost entirely unrecoverable, with mechanical drives the data can be recovered with a lot less difficulty & expence. Though as you say these drives are used in massively redundant arrays so the chance a drive would need to be recovered like that is remote.
    If the data matters, it will be not only on backup but on remote disaster recovery server automatically duplicated from the main server. Given these are on near line storage, there might be a copy on slower bulk storage in a slower tier. If someone is dropping a million or so on their storage (the traditional users of these drives) then they don't muck about.

  9. #9
    Banned - repeated insults to other members
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    146
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    4 times in 3 posts

    Re: Seagate launches sixth and last generation of 15K HDDs

    Quote Originally Posted by zaph0d View Post
    But for the same price you could get at least half-a-dozen bigger consumer drives and put 'em in raid 0+1, get 15TB worth of raid0 at 500MB/s on the inside track and 750MB/s at the edge.

    This is what I use as a Main storage drive and as long as the game install is under 12GB I'll load it in ramdrive and play it from there with near zero loadtimes, if it's over 12GB I'll copy it to SSD and take the loadtime penalty whenever I want to play. At least until I double my Ram to 48GB that is
    Rack space and power consumption for that many drives in a data centre will kill you in an enterprise TCO analysis. Gaming comparison?! Really?

  10. #10
    Banned - repeated insults to other members
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    146
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    4 times in 3 posts

    Re: Seagate launches sixth and last generation of 15K HDDs

    Google's white paper suggests that redundant arrays, RAID, RAID rebuilding etc. etc. are all hog wash.

    Just use JBOD arrays and dumb drives (mechanical or SSD) then duplicate, triplicate etc. the data. Using slower tiers or near-line storage even. Way cleaner management, faster performance, better data security and lower cost.

    That's why I dun use any RAID devices either.

  11. #11
    Banned - repeated insults to other members
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    146
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    4 times in 3 posts

    Re: Seagate launches sixth and last generation of 15K HDDs

    Quote Originally Posted by zaph0d View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    However, with an SSD there is no rotational latency, which is why I struggle to see why there is still a market for these things.
    I think the only reason there's still a market is the fact that a dead SSD is completely dead and data is almost entirely unrecoverable, with mechanical drives the data can be recovered with a lot less difficulty & expence. Though as you say these drives are used in massively redundant arrays so the chance a drive would need to be recovered like that is remote.
    Google's white paper suggests that redundant arrays, RAID, RAID rebuilding etc. etc. are all hog wash.

    Just use JBOD arrays and dumb drives (mechanical or SSD) then duplicate, triplicate etc. the data. Using slower tiers or near-line storage even. Way cleaner management, faster performance, better data security and lower cost.

    That's why I dun bother with any RAID devices either.

  12. #12
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    12,526
    Thanks
    736
    Thanked
    1,461 times in 1,231 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 32GB 3200MHz ECC
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Linux, 2TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 35 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Iiyama 27" 1440p
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: Seagate launches sixth and last generation of 15K HDDs

    Quote Originally Posted by preter_s View Post
    Google's white paper suggests that redundant arrays, RAID, RAID rebuilding etc. etc. are all hog wash.

    Just use JBOD arrays and dumb drives (mechanical or SSD) then duplicate, triplicate etc. the data. Using slower tiers or near-line storage even. Way cleaner management, faster performance, better data security and lower cost.

    That's why I dun bother with any RAID devices either.


    Lower cost?

    Say you store on raid 6, and you have a 6 data + 2 parity stripe setup. So to store your 6 disks worth of data, you have to buy another 2 disks.
    Now you switch to cloud storage. To get the same redundancy level as raid 6 (data in 3 places) now your 6 disks worth of data need to be stored on 18 disks.

    Now big companies don't have one raid stripe, they buy by the rack full and spend millions. So a more reasonable scenario would be that instead of spending £800K on disks, you need £1.8M worth of drives. That is for the same redundancy level, so saying "just buy consumer drives" works equally well in both setups.

    Then there is the performance. In the cloud system, you find the nearest server and read the data from its disk. If the cloud is in one room and you have the latest protocols, you might read from three servers at once tripling your throughput. In the raid array, you read from all 6 drives in the stripe at the same time.

    Google are different. They want their data in at least three countries, individual task throughput isn't that important. But most companies aren't Google.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •