Print 20 comment(s) - last by grenableu.. on Apr 12 at 7:50 AM

Samsung announces new SpinPoint drives for the enterprise market

Although Fujitsu may be looking to solid-state storage (SSD) to replace 1.8" hard disc drives (HDDs), the market for fast 2.5" HDDs is still alive and well. Just last month, Fujitsu and Seagate announced 160GB 2.5" hard drives spinning at 7200RPM. Samsung has today upped the ante with a 2.5" enterprise 7200RPM HDD that boasts a capacity of up to 200GB.

The new SpinPoint MP1 Series utilizes perpendicular recording to achieve a density of 100GB per platter. The MP1 Series will be available in capacities of 80GB, 120GB, 160GB and 200GB and will support cache sizes of 8MB or 16MB.

All utilize a Serial ATA 3.0Gbps interface and feature native command queuing (NCQ). The drives also feature a rotary vibration controller (RVC) to protect drive from vibration and shock and are available with a free-fall sensor.

Samsung says that the MP1 series is designed for use in workstations, RAID servers, and blade servers. No pricing has been announced, but will likely be available closer to its May 2007 mass production date.

Comments     Threshold

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

RE: The Internet is for Porn
By Mitch101 on 4/11/2007 11:59:29 AM , Rating: 2
I work in the server area for me its all the same as we generally only use 15K RPM drives.

7200rpm 2.5" is a performance laptop drive to me with the word enterprise stuck to it so they can charge more.

I read in a google report that they found no difference in lifespan on drives whether enterprise or standard and even when running cooler. I think dailytech posted the article.

RE: The Internet is for Porn
By bysmitty on 4/11/2007 12:22:34 PM , Rating: 2
You are not comparing apples to apples. With the smaller platers, you get higher data density. A 2.5" HD spinning at 7,200rpm will read / write more data than a 3.5" HD spinning at 7,200rpm.


RE: The Internet is for Porn
By Mitch101 on 4/11/2007 12:38:36 PM , Rating: 2
Denser platters provide possibly higher data rates not smaller. There are a lot of factors when talking about drive performance. While platter densities can help so does head/rotational latency, interface, and rpm to name the most major of the factors.

Raptors do so well because of how fast the heads can get to the data on the drive yet thier density is much less of nearly all drives on the market. The 10K rpm also helps. Put a raptor against most of the drives out there today in random R/W and it will eat drives with twice the platter density.

Were comparing 2.5" 7200 rpm to 3.5" 15,000RPM drives.

RE: The Internet is for Porn
By teddy6 on 4/11/2007 1:37:44 PM , Rating: 2
Higher RPM drives use smaller platters, so comparing "platter density" is an apples to oranges comparison. Current 7200RPM drives do have higher areal densities than the raptor and other high RPM drives, but the differences isn't as great as first appearance, and it should be noted that the 150GB Raptor is more than a year old. At release, its areal density was quite competitive. A mythical Raptor with four 3.5" platters would have a capacity in the low 400GB range. The only drive currently "available" that has twice the areal density of a Raptor is the 1 TB Hitachi drive that you can't buy without a Dell computer. Nothing else is really even close.

"Were comparing 2.5" 7200 rpm to 3.5" 15,000RPM drives."

3.5" is only a reference to the form factor, not the platter size. 3.5" 15k drives have platters roughly 2.5-2.7" depending on the manufacturer.

RE: The Internet is for Porn
By Mitch101 on 4/11/2007 2:46:52 PM , Rating: 2
Yup what I failed to convey is that while the platters are smaller the platter density is the same on most today now that they are using perpendicular technology.

Essentially this is nothing more than todays 3.5" form factor 7200rpm drive using a smaller platter. Hence less data space because of the lack of surface area.

I would imagine because of the reduced platter size they can easily slap on ENTERPRISE because of the reduced vibration a larger platter could have.

But its nice to see what I would consider to be a 7200rpm laptop drive come along.

RE: The Internet is for Porn
By grenableu on 4/12/2007 7:50:11 AM , Rating: 2
I got to agree. Who would put a 7200rpm drive in a server? Even 10K drives are getting squeezed out in favor of 15K.

RE: The Internet is for Porn
By kumandos on 4/11/2007 1:44:02 PM , Rating: 2
Could you explain what kind of magis is this you're talking about?
Because...I just can't figure out how you can read data faster off 100GB however smaller(even 1cm) from 100GB how ever bigger(lets give it 100KM) rotating at the same speed?!?! ;D

If i draw 5cm circle in 1s and I'll draw 100cm circle in 1s, it's still 1 second...Isn't it?

Magic I say...or lack of imagination.

...and yes 3,5' drive will be faster than a 2,5' drive with same platter capacity(for example - you can fit more and faster stuff into a bigger drive).

RE: The Internet is for Porn
By teddy6 on 4/11/2007 5:59:45 PM , Rating: 3
The parent post is not correct, smaller platters do not equate to faster transfer rates if all that was done was shrink the platter size with the equivalent capacity reduction.

That said, if I can properly translate your post into English, there is no magic necessary to read the same amount of data off a platter faster than a second platter spinning at the same rate. It all depends on how the data is structured on the platter.

If 2 same size platters have the same capacity, the platter with the lower track density, will have a higher cluster density which will result in a higher STR. It's not magic or lack of imagination, it's the simple fact that the more clusters you squeeze into each track, the more data there will be to be read during each platter rotation.

It's also false that a 3.5" drive with the same platter capacity will be faster. It's actually the other way around. A 2.5" 100GB platter spinning at 7200rpm's will be considerably faster than a 3.5" 100GB platter spinning at the same 7200rpm's under all conditions.

"A lot of people pay zero for the cellphone ... That's what it's worth." -- Apple Chief Operating Officer Timothy Cook

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