Seagate Announces 1TB Drives
Anh Tuan Huynh
June 25, 2007 3:15 PM
comment(s) - last by
New Barracuda 7200.11 and ES.2 offer capacities up to 1TB with 32MB caches
Seagate today unveiled two 1TB hard drives for consumer and enterprise markets – the new
Barracuda 7200.11 and Barracuda ES.2
. Seagate claims to have “the world’s most advanced family of one terabyte drives” with the new Barracuda models.
The new Barracuda 7200.11 is the follow up to last year’s
, ready to take on
Hitachi and Samsung 1TB
offerings. Seagate packs the 1TB Barracuda 7200.11 with 32MB of L2 cache, SATA 3.0Gbps and native command queuing support. The Barracuda 7200.11 makes use of four 250GB platters with second-generation
perpendicular magnetic recording technology
, or PMR. Seagate claims the new Barracuda 7200.11 can sustain 105MB/s data rate.
Even with four platters, Seagate claims the new Barracuda 7200.11 only draws 8-watts during idle and 11.6-watts during seek. Acoustically, the Barracuda 7200.11 generates around 27-to-29 decibels of noise during idle and seeking tasks. As with all new Barracuda generations, the 7200.11 improvements and technologies trickle down to smaller sizes. Seagate also offers the Barracuda 7200.11 in 750GB and 500GB sizes with the same 32MB buffer and PMR technology. Due to smaller sizes, the 750GB drive makes use of three platters while the 500GB drive has two platters.
Seagate’s new Barracuda ES.2 models cater towards the enterprise markets. Although it is similar to the Barracuda 7200.11, Seagate offers the ES.2 with serial attached SCSI, or SAS, interfaces. Seagate has also raised the MTBF rating of the Barracuda ES.2 to 1.2 million hours, up 200 thousand hours from the previous Barracuda ES.
Expect the Barracuda 7200.11 and ES.2 to arrive sometime this quarter in capacities up to 1TB. Seagate prices the 1TB Barracuda 7200.11 with an MSRP of $399. As with other Seagate drives, the new Barracuda 7200.11 and ES.2 come with five year warranties.
This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
6/26/2007 9:15:52 AM
Taking advantage of the fact that you know quite a bit about HDD tech, I'll ask you something I've asked myself for years:
Why seems to be not viable to use more than one read/write head per platter to improve performance?
I'm sure that such an obvious thing didn't get implemented because there are serious engineering limitations to it... Limitations which I don't know but would really like to!
If you could clarify why can't a hard disk use an approach similar to what kenwood's old cdrom units used to improve performance, I'd really appreciate it! :D
6/26/2007 1:20:06 PM
Re: your multiple head per platter question: This is an easy one, because it is not economically feasible. 2 heads would require controlling electronics that are a lot more complex and a completely different method of writing data to the disk. If you have two heads on separate spindles then it gets even more complex. The bulk of consumers are interested in storage capacity rather than read speed, thus the industry has focused most of the development on capacity.
As to your question re: Kenwoods Cd-Rom technology, CD-Roms are optical media and work on a fundamentally different principal then magnetic media. If you clarify what they did I might be able to correlate it to HDD tech, but otherwise optical disks and hard drives are quite dissimilar. In fact, I think the only technology they share in some respects is drawn to the platters themselves, as magnetic disks quite often use a pit/groove pattern in the platter itself to pre-format a servo pattern in the disk.
6/26/2007 9:28:06 PM
I've always thought about this question as well. I have to say that it always struck me as something much more complex to accomplish becuase to really see the most improvement the hardware would have to specifically made to utilize the multiple 'threads' of data coming in. Which, is to say, you're response makes logical sense and fits with what I imagined.
Maybe next-gen drives are what it's going to take to push this idea into the mainstream and make it profitable. I bet Seagate (at the least) has toyed around with this whole idea and come to some kind of cost analysis equation. Since there isn't anything faster that is commercially viable why play all your cards? Especially when, honestly, as nice as super-fast drives would be I do get a lot of use out of the bigger size for the moment.
PS - thanks for the info! \(^o^)/
"My sex life is pretty good" -- Steve Jobs' random musings during the 2010 D8 conference
Seagate, Samsung Begin to Ship 1TB Desktop Hard Drives
June 19, 2007, 12:20 PM
750GB Seagate Drives On Store Shelves: $540
April 28, 2006, 2:59 AM
3/7/2014 Daily Hardware Reviews
March 7, 2014, 10:19 AM
Quick Note: OCZ Z-Drive 4500 PCIe SSD Gets Official
March 4, 2014, 9:53 AM
3/4/2014 Daily Hardware Reviews
March 4, 2014, 8:45 AM
2/27/2014 Daily Hardware Reviews
February 27, 2014, 11:54 AM
2/26/2014 Daily Hardware Reviews
February 26, 2014, 10:28 AM
AVADirect Unleashes High-End Supermicro, Tyan GPU Servers
February 7, 2014, 12:35 PM
Most Popular Articles
Malaysian Airlines Flight 370 Made Wild Altitude Changes
March 14, 2014, 9:21 PM
Tesla Motors Calls New Jersey Out on New Rule Against Its Direct Sales Model
March 11, 2014, 12:01 PM
Hack Reveals Fallen Bitcoin CEO's Posh Tokyo Penthouse
March 10, 2014, 4:28 PM
Apple Authorized to Seek $40 Per Device Against Samsung
March 13, 2014, 4:31 PM
Man Who Shot Father for Texting During Movie Previews Was Also Texting
March 14, 2014, 2:25 PM
Latest Blog Posts
Retail Mobile Sites Experience Outages in Light of Simplexity's Bankruptcy
Mar 14, 2014, 8:48 AM
Tesla vs. BMW: Who Has the Safer EV?
Feb 1, 2014, 2:56 PM
Justice Leaks Details of Next HTC One Two Flagship Phone
Dec 5, 2013, 4:04 PM
Global Cyber Espionage Concerns Reveal Growing Cyber Armies
Nov 29, 2013, 11:04 AM
Is The Period Becoming an Expression of Anger?
Nov 26, 2013, 2:02 PM
More Blog Posts
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. -
Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information