The future of storage will still have HDDs in it if Seagate has anything to say about it

Subject: General Tech | November 5, 2018 - 03:24 PM |
Tagged: Seagate, hdd, HAMR, 100TB

Seagate is looking to create its own law about the increase of density in its products, aiming to double capacity every 30 months on its hard drive families.  They may not be as fast and sexy as an NVMe drive, but for long term storage which you don't expect to be constantly accessed, the price is very attractive.  They will no longer be using perpendicular magnetic recording, with all lines moving to HAMR, which should allow them to create a 20TB or greater drive by 2020 and perhaps reach 100TB by 2026.  Other companies are investigating different recording technologies, which The Register briefly mentions here.

View Full Size

"Seagate has set a course to deliver a 48TB disk drive in 2023 using its HAMR (heat-assisted magnetic recording) technology, doubling areal density every 30 months, meaning 100TB could be possible by 2025/26."

Here is some more Tech News from around the web:

Tech Talk

Source: The Register

Video News

November 5, 2018 | 05:36 PM - Posted by elites2012

i like the idea. i use HDD for long term storage and ssd just to boot.

November 5, 2018 | 06:57 PM - Posted by willmore


November 5, 2018 | 07:33 PM - Posted by Windrunner (not verified)

With how many of my Seagate drives that've failed, I fully believe they already smack them with hammers as the last step in manufacturing.

November 5, 2018 | 08:12 PM - Posted by collie

I'd be terrified to have 20 tb on one disk, 'SPECIALY A spinning one. To be honest I expected to see masive emmc or similar slower cheaper non michanical drives by now, but I don't think that's in the pipeline anymore

November 6, 2018 | 09:45 AM - Posted by Anonymous0 (not verified)

Yeah, that would be stupid to keep all your data on a single 20TB disc. That's what data duplication and backups are for. Get three 20TB discs, manage file backups on site and off site and cloud. If one drive or all drives fail, your data is still safe while you fix it.

One significant advantage to HDD failure is that you can always physically swap the platters to a working drive - assuming head failure. HAMR drives don't use Helium, making repairs a lot easier. SSDs are sometimes recoverable even if the OS can't read it, but more advanced data recovery requires tracing circuits and even swapping PCBs and resoldering - it's nowhere near as simple as HDD recovery.

Backup all your data, kids!

November 7, 2018 | 12:10 PM - Posted by collie

You are suggesting 60TB of spinning drives, a 20tb cloud backup and possibility even a 4th of site 20tb drive for 20tb of data?

I don't even understand who that would make any-sense for, at a corporate level you could NEVER convince a B.O.D. to authorize that expense other than possibly to max out unused flex but the sheer heat and power comparison makes it enviable. If you are using a render monster than those drives are going to slow you WAYY the fuck down. And if you just some guy with all the moneys and wants every game, every document, every video and even every mp3 from your old napster colection EVER on one drive then, well you gots all the moneys, why not spend all dem moneys on ssd. Samsung already has a 30tb 2.5" ssd.

November 5, 2018 | 08:49 PM - Posted by Jgr9 (not verified)

Get more particular.

November 6, 2018 | 02:30 AM - Posted by James

It seems like flash based storage would have a massive power advantage over spinning disk. What is YouTube stored on these days?

November 6, 2018 | 03:15 AM - Posted by Anonymous1 (not verified)

"The future of storage will still have HDDs in it if Seagate has anything to say about it"

STFU Seagate! :D

November 6, 2018 | 03:25 AM - Posted by Justin Stephenson (not verified)

I do wonder how long it would take a typical NAS to rebuild a RAID 5 array of 4x20TB disks

November 6, 2018 | 10:28 AM - Posted by Particle (not verified)

The funny thing to me is that as drives have become bigger without getting much faster, I've found myself going to wider arrays of smaller disks instead.

I tossed my 5 TB SATA disks for scores of 450 GB 15K SAS disks. Double parity with fast rebuild times due to the small unit size goes a long way toward data protection.

Time has also taught me that mirrored disks don't help regular users one bit. It just buys a little bit more time until they'll be in the same position they would have been with a single disk. They virtually never notice when an array has been degraded. Solid state has helped there quite a bit.

November 10, 2018 | 07:04 PM - Posted by chipman (not verified)

So Seagate announced its law of doubling hardware defects every 2.5 years... great!

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote><p><br>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.