SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Seagate BarraCuda Pro 14TB HDD Review: Massive Storage for Desktops
The exponential increase in data storage requirements over the last decade or so has been handled by regular increases in hard drive capacities. Multiple HDD vendors supply them to cloud providers (who get the main benefits from advancements in hard drive technologies), but, Seagate is the only one to also focus on the home consumer / prosumer market. In the last three generations, we have seen that Seagate has been the first to target the desktop storage market with their highest capacity drives. The 10 TB BarraCuda Pro was released in Q3 2016, and the 12 TB version in Q4 2017. Seagate is launching the 14 TB version today.
The Seagate BarraCuda Pro 14TB is a 7200RPM SATAIII (6 Gbps) hard drive with a 256MB multi-segmented DRAM cache. It features eight PMR platters with a 1077 Gb/in2 areal density in a sealed enclosure filled with helium. The main change compared to the 12TB version introduced last year is the usage of two-dimensional magnetic recording (TDMR) heads, allowing for higher areal density (1077 Gb/in2 vs. 923 Gb/in2 without TDMR).
Launch price is $580.
Toshiba has also announced new 12 and 14 TB hard drives, aimed at businesses:
Toshiba is announcing that it has started sampling of its latest MG07SCA-series enterprise-class helium-filled hard drives. Notable for utilizing a dual-port SAS interface, the HDDs are aimed at business-critical servers and are rated for 550 TB per year workloads.
Toshiba's MG07SCA lineup of enterprise-grade hard drive includes two SKUs at 12 TB and 14 TB respectively. The flagship 14 TB model relies on nine PMR platters from Showa Denko with ~1.56 TB capacity each, whereas the 12 TB model relies on eight platters. Both HDDs feature a 7200 RPM spindle speed, a 256 MB cache buffer, and a dual-port SAS 12 Gbps interface. Just like their SATA brethren, the new SAS hard drives are based on Toshiba's latest-gen helium-filled platform for business-critical HDDs with all the possible enhancements to improve reliability and durability, including top and bottom attached motors, RVFF, environmental sensors, and so on.
Previously: Seagate Launches Consumer-Oriented 12 TB Drives
Related: Western Digital Announces 12-14 TB Hard Drives and an 8 TB SSD
Seagate's 12 TB HDDs Are in Use, and 16 TB is Planned for 2018
Western Digital Shipping 14 TB Helium-Filled Shingled Magnetic Recording Hard Drives
Toshiba Announces its Own Helium-Filled 12-14 TB Hard Drives, with "Conventional Magnetic Recording"
Seagate Announces a 14 TB Helium-Filled PMR Hard Drive
(Score: 2, Funny) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Tuesday September 11 2018, @07:08PM (3 children)
William Jefferson Clinton can only stand at attention so many times over the years that remain before my Tick expires
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Tuesday September 11 2018, @08:05PM (2 children)
8K uncompressed video at 120fps is 15GBytes/sec. This can store 15 minutes.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 11 2018, @09:24PM (1 child)
does it even make sense to store uncompressed 8K video?
I mean video, not science footage (where it does make sense sometimes).
I assume if you use x264 with very mild compression you still get huge bitrate reductions for regular subject matter.
and if you say "I want to film a crowd, then zoom into individual faces", I will again say that that is not home video.
(Score: 4, Informative) by takyon on Tuesday September 11 2018, @09:38PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-high-definition_television#Field_trials_of_UHDTV_over_DTT_networks [wikipedia.org]
8K @ ~60 FPS, H.264, 92 Mbps. 14 TB = 2 weeks and 2 hours.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bob_super on Tuesday September 11 2018, @07:10PM (4 children)
It's gonna be a lot faster to just take a flight to Korea with the drive every time I need to do a cloud backup.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by fyngyrz on Tuesday September 11 2018, @07:21PM (3 children)
With these drives, you'd be better off just having pairs of them and backing up between the pairs. In different machines on a fast LAN, if possible.
The extra drive(s) and host would probably cost you less than 14TB per drive of cloud over the lifetime of the drives, be considerably more secure, faster, not subject the vagaries of a WAN connection.
Or, you know, you could just give Google or Amazon or Apple, etc., your money. They'd like that. There's every good reason to do so. Such as... er... because cloud!!!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 11 2018, @07:55PM
Buy a half dozen of these. Set up a RAID-1, and rotate them out periodically, so you have an active redundant copy and four backup copies.
(Score: 3, Funny) by bob_super on Tuesday September 11 2018, @08:54PM (1 child)
You have been too good at staying away from MBAs.
A second drive is a depreciating asset, which takes three years to amortize. Dem Clouds are a small recurring expense that fits in a different column, and fits in the disaster recovery -building destroyed- plan.
My comment was about the US government working hard to make us less competitive, anyway.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 12 2018, @12:19AM
Ah, now, finally, the purpose of "the cloud" makes sense.
It's to allow the mba's in the finance dept. to reallocate the expenses into a different tax category.
(Score: 3, Funny) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday September 11 2018, @07:28PM
From TFA:
What the fuck, guys?! If we'd wanted drives with a five year warranty that could actually be powered on the entire five years, don't you think other vendors would be selling them? I mean it's blindingly obvious that we want drives engineered to run a light workload eight hours a day tops and anything over a two year limited warranty is just showing off.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 11 2018, @08:18PM (2 children)
https://old.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/ [reddit.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 11 2018, @08:21PM (1 child)
& related discussion:
https://old.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/9eo2ai/bigger_is_better_seagate_announces_14tb_consumer/ [reddit.com]
(Score: 2) by takyon on Tuesday September 11 2018, @08:48PM
https://slickdeals.net/f/12017423 [slickdeals.net]
Yeah, price is not great. I haven't kept up too closely with HDD pricing but the reddit thread mentions 8 TB for $150.
The interesting thing is that we are still seeing capacity being squeezed out of PMR, aided of course by helium and high platter counts. It looks like 1.8 TB platters are possible [sdk.co.jp], meaning we could see a 16 TB PMR drive with 9 platters. If HAMR/MAMR continue to be delayed, maybe we'll see the mythical 2 TB PMR platters [showadenkohd.com.sg].
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Entropy on Tuesday September 11 2018, @09:19PM (8 children)
I've seen more Seagate drives fail than any other brand. Not sure about you guys, but they are off my buy list for years now.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 11 2018, @09:34PM
I've got an old 1 tb micronet fantom thats been going for 9 years now. Sometimes theres a spark in the room and it resets its USB connection but it still works.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 11 2018, @11:14PM (3 children)
Sad but true. Seagate used to be one of the go-to brands, but nowadays they're the most unreliable of the bunch [backblaze.com]. Shame on you, Seagate.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 12 2018, @12:00AM (2 children)
Backblaze is interesting. But the problem is the mixture of at least 5 generations and survivor bias in their stats. If you have 40 drives for one sample and 14,000 in another not totally sure you can compare those numbers. But yeah get an HGST. If you look at the 10+TB drives Seagate is about all they have.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 12 2018, @12:13AM (1 child)
I've already been running a couple dozen HGST Travelstar 7K1000 1TB 2.5" drives for a couple of years. Had 3 early failures, but those that made it through the first few weeks have been running ever since. They're among the fastest 2.5" HDDs too and they're relatively quiet. After having lived with the declining quality of Seagate, WD and Samsung years before, these have been a revelation.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday September 13 2018, @01:27AM
HGST is now a WD subsidiary. Any differences in production quality have probably evaporated by now (Western Digital still brands drives with HGST [anandtech.com]).
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Kilo110 on Wednesday September 12 2018, @05:08AM (2 children)
Ive a raid array of seagate greens with over 6 years of power on time and still ticking.
(Score: 2) by Entropy on Wednesday September 12 2018, @11:51AM
Some people win russian roulette...but it doesn't make that a sound bet.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 12 2018, @02:46PM
Do they actually tick? It wouldn't surprise me :)
(Score: 2) by Appalbarry on Wednesday September 12 2018, @12:22AM (5 children)
Admittedly I don't download everything that appears on the Pirate Bay, but still I'm having trouble coming close to filling up a 2TB drive. Right now it holds all of my music, all of my photos (back to about 2000), all of my documents (back to hmmm... whenever we've moved from the Commodore 64 to a PC. It was a Cyrix 486DX CPU, so that would put it at about 1994?), tons of backups of web sites since retired, Gmail, and before that whatever email program I was using.
All that's missing is about six months of docs and pictures that were nuked during a particularly sudden hard drive crash.
Behind me is a shelf with eight or ten hard drives, which gives me a series of backups created every time I upgraded to the hard drive in a system - copy everything over to the new drive, then hang onto the old one.
The thing that I do like about cheap 14TB drives is that it should drive the price of smaller ones down to almost nothing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 12 2018, @04:22AM
Audio/video processing eat up storage pretty quickly.
(Score: 2) by Kilo110 on Wednesday September 12 2018, @05:10AM
Video games these days can top 100gb per title. (Final fantasy 15 is 150gb if you install the full resolution files)
(Score: 2) by bobthecimmerian on Wednesday September 12 2018, @11:13AM
I have our entire seven hundred disk Blu Ray and DVD collection ripped. If I kept it in the original H.264 and mpeg2 video formats it would eat more than ten TB of space. Instead I've re-encoded everything to H.265 and it's down to 3TB, but the re-encoding process took over half a year on my five year old AMD eight core CPU. During the process I had the files spread across three hard drives that were 4TB each.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 12 2018, @01:52PM
The day after you buy a pro video camera or two, you'll find that you'll need boxes of huge capacity harddrives
(Score: 2) by takyon on Wednesday September 12 2018, @05:36PM
http://forum.spaceengine.org/viewtopic.php?t=297 [spaceengine.org]
An estimate of what it would take to add all stars from the final Gaia [wikipedia.org] catalog to Space Engine: 34 bytes per star for 1,142,679,769 stars, representing 0.5% of the Milky Way galaxy. That's 36.2 GiB (about 38.85 GB). If the database ID index was doubled to 64 bits, that would be 38 bytes per star, and adding another 2 bytes for the spectral class gets you to 40 bytes.
200 billion is a lower estimate for the number of stars in the Milky Way. A future mission may track every star in the galaxy. 400 billion @ 40 bytes each would be 16 terabytes. Which busts through this measly 14 TB drive.
The actual data that will be collected by the Gaia mission is closer to 200 TB uncompressed. Again, that's for a fraction of our galaxy's stars, although they also find some asteroids, large exoplanets, extragalactic stars, etc.
Space Engine offers Solar System HD [spaceengine.org] and Solar System Ultra [spaceengine.org] add-ons that add higher resolution imagery of the terrestrial planets, Ceres, Vesta, Pluto, Triton, etc. These total over 10 GB per object for Venus and Earth. And it's just a starting point. There will be more missions to more solar system objects. And if you consider something like Earth, there's petabytes [gearthblog.com] of imagery of the surface (even more if you count Street View [gmapswidget.com]).
Finally, you have hundreds of billions of galaxies in the universe, and we're starting to locate individual stars and other objects in other galaxies. And of course, we know about thousands of exoplanets, but there are likely trillions. We may locate a lot more of these objects later in the century, if we can launch many cheap and big telescopes, gravitational lensing telescopes, etc.
In conclusion, if you want to explore the universe using data not stored on some remote server, you'll eventually want more than 14-16 terabytes of local storage (a lot of RAM would be nice too). SSD manufacturers are going to be the first to reach crazy milestones like 100 TB and 1 PB in a single 3.5" or 2.5" drive. If they can also narrow or eliminate the $/TB gap, then HDDs will be dead.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]