backtop


Print 18 comment(s) - last by ShieTar.. on Mar 23 at 10:33 AM


perpendicular versus HAMR tech  (Source: Seagate)
HAMR is so hype

Over the years, hard drive manufacturers have moved to perpendicular recording technology, which allowed for much higher storage capacities on a traditional hard drive platter. Seagate is hard at work on the future of hard drive storage technology that will usher in even higher capacities. Seagate has announced that it has become the first hard drive manufacturer to reach a density of one terabit per square inch on a platter.
 
Seagate's demonstration of the technology shows how the capacity of today's hard drives can be doubled when the technology launches in commercially available products later this decade. The tech will lead to 3.5-inch HDD's with a capacity of up to 60 TB in the decade that follows.
 
The technology allowed Seagate to reach the huge storage density is called heat-assisted magnetic recording or HAMR.
 
The perpendicular magnetic recording technology in all use currently debuted in 2006 and replaced longitudinal recording technology that had been used since hard drives were invented. Perpendicular magnetic recording is expected to reach the capacity limit of close to one terabyte per square inch in the next few years.
 
“The growth of social media, search engines, cloud computing, rich media and other data-hungry applications continues to stoke demand for ever greater storage capacity,” said Mark Re, SVP of Heads and Media Research and Development at Seagate. “Hard drive innovations like HAMR will be a key enabler of the development of even more data-intense applications in the future, extending the ways businesses and consumers worldwide use, manage and store digital content.”
 
HAMR technology allows Seagate to achieve a linear bit density of around 2 million bits per inch, which was once thought to be impossible. That allows the data density of over 1 trillion bits per square inch, which is 55% higher than the areal density of 620 Gb per square inch available today. The first generation HAMR HDD's are expected to have capacities of up to 6 TB in 3.5-inch form and up to 2 TB in 2.5-inch form. The theoretical density limit for hard drives using this technology will be up to 60 TB for 3.5-inch drives in up to 20 TB for 2.5-inch drives.
 
The big advance with HAMR technology was the switch in the coating used on discs inside hard drives from a cobalt platinum alloy to iron platinum alloy. The stronger magnetic material helps stabilize data bits in smaller sizes. It's nice to see research continues despite the HDD shortage the market is facing.

Source: Seagate



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Common Seagate...
By StevoLincolnite on 3/20/2012 11:13:28 AM , Rating: 3
Love this quote:
quote:
“The growth of social media, search engines, cloud computing, rich media and other data-hungry applications continues to stoke demand for ever greater storage capacity,”


Funnily enough, most of that "data" doesn't reside on your machine. Social media, search engines and cloud computing is all streamed.

I think this past statement they made is more accurate:
quote:
"Let's face it, we're not changing the world. We're building a product that helps people buy more crap - and watch porn."


I'm also craving for cheap mechanical drive prices again. - It hurts the pocket when a 1tb drive is at-least 2x as expensive as they were before.




RE: Common Seagate...
By Kurz on 3/20/2012 11:23:59 AM , Rating: 4
The data is streamed... but it must reside on a harddrive somewhere. Hence Facebook, Google, etc all need faster and higher density drives.


RE: Common Seagate...
By StevoLincolnite on 3/20/2012 12:42:48 PM , Rating: 2
With drives in the realm of hundreds of gigabytes, I doubt facebook would even approach a single gigabyte in size for your user data.


RE: Common Seagate...
By DennisB on 3/21/2012 8:03:53 AM , Rating: 2
two years of facebook
http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2011/10/20/law-stu...

http://otsipaku.hubpages.com/hub/How-much-does-Fac...

Just post pictures alone should get you 1 GB quickly.
1GB = 10000 x avatar pics = 1000 x normal pics


RE: Common Seagate...
By theapparition on 3/20/2012 12:48:02 PM , Rating: 4
While higher density is always welcome, manufacturers need to look at reliability a lot closer as well. What good is a 100TB drive that only lasts a year.

And I'm looking strait at you Seagate. About to replace another hard drive in my home server, and lo and behold its another Seagate. Done with them and their stupid Maxtor acquisition.


RE: Common Seagate...
By Souka on 3/20/2012 3:04:25 PM , Rating: 2
It's a balancing game....

Speed - capacity - price

For a media server, I'd be very happy with a reliable 100TB drive that has a piss-poor transfer rate.

On the other hand, for video editing workspace I'll take high capacity and fast...reliability isn't critical as it's only a temporary workspace.


RE: Common Seagate...
By MWink on 3/20/2012 11:40:45 PM , Rating: 2
I agree 100%. I think they need to perfect the current technology before moving on to a new one. Then again, few companies bother with such things these days.

I noticed a sharp drop in HD reliability around the time they started selling drives with perpendicular recording technology, especially Seagates.

Right now I'm working on a system that appears to have a dying Seagate 750GB HD. SMART shows over 500 bad sectors however apparently that is not enough to trip the SMART on these drives. I know it definitely has some bad sectors as I found 14 the first time I scanned it. I wonder how many bad sectors Seagate thinks is enough to call a drive bad?

Anyway I'm pretty disgusted with the drives Seagate has made in the last ~5 years. It's sad because those ~10 year old Barracuda IV's were awesome. I have some of them still in use today. I also hate that they've decreased their warranty again (though WD did as well). I guess for now I'll stick to WD drives since there aren't many other options.


RE: Common Seagate...
By ShieTar on 3/23/2012 10:33:55 AM , Rating: 3
But it is rather unlikely that the majority of users today would buy a 100GB drive for the same price as a 1TB drive, just because it is more reliable. It is not a selling argument for the masses that go and buy their homeserver at a big electro-market.

And all the big producers do sell more reliable versions of their harddrives. If your dying "Seagate" happens to be a Barracuda, why don't you get a Constellation next time?

It's not really Seagates fault that people these days insist on building servers with drives that are not designed to be in servers. It is the peoples fault for buying the cheapest alternative when a more realiable solution is only available
at a premium price.


Stop!
By GulWestfale on 3/20/2012 10:51:15 AM , Rating: 4
HAMR time!

and tomorrow, toshiba will unveil its HAMR competitor, codenamed 'Ice Ice Baby'.

both technologies will last about 3 years before they will be replaced by IBM's 'Nirvana'.




RE: Stop!
By curelom on 3/20/2012 11:19:31 AM , Rating: 3
Things that make you go hmmmmm.


RE: Stop!
By Omega215D on 3/20/2012 11:36:44 PM , Rating: 2
Soon they want EFX...


RE: Stop!
By bigdawg1988 on 3/20/2012 11:23:01 AM , Rating: 2
Actually, they'll all be put out of business by the Chinese "NWA" drives!


RE: Stop!
By Dr of crap on 3/20/2012 12:34:11 PM , Rating: 2
Wait -
NWA from China!


RE: Stop!
By Samus on 3/20/2012 12:56:16 PM , Rating: 2
diversify those bonds, yo.

Wu tang


RE: Stop!
By GulWestfale on 3/20/2012 9:53:30 PM , Rating: 1
http://www.therealtaiwan.com/nigger-king/724

my friend went there, and too photos (not the blogger, different other chap).
it's a huge chain apparently, specializing in hip-hop clothing.


Backwards?
By pwnsweet on 3/20/2012 6:54:44 PM , Rating: 2
So current perpendicular recording will allow for close to 1 tera byte per square inch in the next few years and then we'll go backwards and go down to 1 tera bit per square inch when they switch to HAMR recording?




RE: Backwards?
By zerocks on 3/20/2012 7:50:20 PM , Rating: 2
"That allows the data density of over 1 trillion bits per square inch, which is 55% higher than the areal density of 620 Gb per square inch available today"
would be about 953 Gb per square inch, over the theoretical 620 Gb per square inch that the perpendicular is to reach (which it hasn't yet)

I wonder what kind of extreme measures we'll see coming from the SSD market to combat the HDD in the future..


It'll fizzle and die
By FastEddieLB on 3/21/2012 1:17:26 AM , Rating: 2
Iron Man: "Hammer tech?"
War Machine: "Yeah..."

Seriously though this sounds awesome for large storage at home.




“And I don't know why [Apple is] acting like it’s superior. I don't even get it. What are they trying to say?” -- Bill Gates on the Mac ads

Related Articles



Latest Headlines
4/21/2014 Hardware Reviews
April 21, 2014, 12:46 PM
4/16/2014 Hardware Reviews
April 16, 2014, 9:01 AM
4/15/2014 Hardware Reviews
April 15, 2014, 11:30 AM
4/11/2014 Hardware Reviews
April 11, 2014, 11:03 AM










botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki