Print 30 comment(s) - last by thinairbikes.. on Apr 2 at 9:48 AM

The thousand gigabyte-per-disk era is almost upon us

Earlier this year Seagate confirmed it would ship a 1TB hard drive before the second half of this year. With the first quarter of this year already over, the launch window for Seagate's next generation drive is rapidly shrinking.

Seagate would not confirm or deny the expectation of a new 7200.11 series this morning.  Seagate representatives responded to our inquiries stating, "We already stated earlier this year that we would have the 1TB drive before the second half of this year." 

Spanish-language site Chilehardware countered Seagate's announcement with specifications of the 11th generation Seagate Barracuda drive, which it listed as follows:
  • 1 Terabyte capacity
  • 7200RPM
  • SATA 3.0Gbps interface
  • Perpendicular recording
  • NCQ
  • 16MB of buffer
  • 4 platters
  • 8 heads
Seagate traditionally reserves new generation designations for platter advancements; the company has never released new generation indicators for storage increases alone.  However, it has been a year refresh since the last platter update so it would not be unrealistic to expect new features on the soon-to-ship devices.

Seagate replied to DailyTech stating, "There is no embargo yet." However, we were still assured that the company would fulfill its ship date promise.

Hitachi Global Storage and Seagate released 1TB hard drive promises within hours of each other last January.  Both manufacturers utilize Komag platter configurations -- Komag is the only platter manufacturer to announce 1TB designs to date.

Comments     Threshold

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

Small typo
By FITCamaro on 3/29/2007 4:07:41 PM , Rating: 2
Hitachi Global Storage and Seagate released 1TB hard drive promises without hours of each other last January.

For the actual article. I can't wait to see which is faster, Hitachi's 5x200GB platters or Seagate's 4x250GB platters. Either way though, it'll continue to drive the price of 500GB drives down for us who can't afford the higher cost per gigabyte of larger drives.

RE: Small typo
By JoKeRr on 3/29/2007 4:11:20 PM , Rating: 3
Hitachi's 1TB drive has 32mb buffer Vs. 16mb on Seagate. I wonder how much performance differential can be attributed to this factor.

RE: Small typo
By mendocinosummit on 3/29/2007 4:21:11 PM , Rating: 2
How much does 32mb of cache actually cost current for a manufacture? I would think that hard drives (not hybrids) should at least be in the 64mb range by now if not more.

RE: Small typo
By FITCamaro on 3/29/2007 4:22:27 PM , Rating: 1
Yes but the Seagate will save time and maybe not need as big a buffer due to not having to change platters as much. But yeah it'd be nice to see the Seagate having a matching size cache.

RE: Small typo
By christianspoer on 3/29/2007 4:24:15 PM , Rating: 2
My thought too.
Especially because the Hitachi 1TB drive is such a strong contestor to the Raptors in many benchmarks.
Going to bee very interesting with the 4 platter design, as it wields higher density!

Right now i'm imagining about a 1TB drive, on a 4 platter desing, with 32MB chache, and 10K RPM! DROOL

RE: Small typo
By gramboh on 3/29/2007 8:03:03 PM , Rating: 2
I was reading on forums that there may be flaws in the way AT tested the Hitatchi 1TB drive. There are allegations the benchmarks may only have ran across the first 10GB or so of the drive where speeds are the highest. I don't think it has been confirmed or not but what the poster was talking about made sense (you have to compare long seeks over the entire drive to a Raptor to see what is faster).

RE: Small typo
By teldar on 3/29/2007 4:29:11 PM , Rating: 2
Hitachi's 1TB drive has 32mb buffer Vs. 16mb on Seagate. I wonder how much performance differential can be attributed to this factor.

Toms did a review of hard drives recently, I believe and the decision was there is no performance difference between 8 or 16 meg cache on hard drives. I think the difference lies more in longevity due to decreased accesses and decreased power consumption for the same reason.


RE: Small typo
By bob661 on 3/30/2007 12:46:48 AM , Rating: 2
Toms did a review of hard drives recently,
Oooh! You said the "T" word. Now go wash your fingers with hydrazine.

RE: Small typo
By cheetah2k on 3/30/2007 1:07:29 AM , Rating: 2
These 1Tb drives definately need a larger 64-128mb SSD buffer, especially if they are going to be used in server side activities.. as a rule of thumb, with having 1 x 1Tb drive doing the work of say 4 x 250mb drives, efficieny over the network is going to be reduced in reading and writing; ie, if you have 10 users accessing 1 drive, as opposed to 10 users accessing 4 drives... 10 CAD users on a network with 1 drive would really drag to a hault.. Therefore more buffer would be of greater use.

To be honest, a proposed 16mb buffer is absolutely crazy from Segate... 32mb from Hitachi is more reasonable, but even thats still low.

Regardless, for a stand alone system 2 of these 1Tb babies in RAID 0 would be just sweet..

"It looks like the iPhone 4 might be their Vista, and I'm okay with that." -- Microsoft COO Kevin Turner
Related Articles

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
Snapchat’s New Sunglasses are a Spectacle – No Pun Intended
September 24, 2016, 9:02 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki