Seagate announces "world's fastest" 6 TB hard drive

[Scorpus]

Seagate has announced what they're claiming is the "world's fastest 6TB HDD", known imaginatively as the Seagate Enterprise Capacity 3.5 HDD. The fast speeds can be mostly put down to an operating speed of 7,200 RPM, which makes the hard drive 25% faster than competing solutions.

The Enterprise Capacity 3.5 HDD boasts either 12 Gb/s SAS connectivity, or standard SATA 6 Gb/s, depending on the model you opt for, delivering a sustained transfer rate of up to 226 MB/s. Seagate also claims the drive offers the "highest density storage per square foot in the industry", as it fits into a standard 3.5" bay.

As the drive is designed for enterprise scenarios such as cloud data centers, it's built for reliability. The drive's data sheet lists a mean time between failure of 1.4 million hours (around 160 years), and has been engineered for constant workloads, or 550 TB of transfers per year.

Alongside the high-end 6 TB model, Seagate will also be offering 5 TB, 4 TB and 2 TB drives with either SATA or SAS connectivity. All drives come with a five year limited warranty, and can be set to self-encrypt and instantly erase if they're used in secure environments.

The drive is shipping now through resellers and will be integrated into storage products this spring. As usual, there's no word on how much the drive will cost, but as it's an enterprise-class performance model we don't expect it'll be cheap.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/56286-seagate-announces-worlds-fastest-6-tb-hard-drive.html

 

[wastedkill]

6TB drive that is somehow faster than 7.2k speeds and with a sexy 160yr lifetime until failure is pretty damn cool but when will we get more word about the 60TB Hard drives coming in 2016?

Techspot fix your articles when I click next article it says the page is missing!!! https://www.techspot.com/news/56281-anti-tech-protesters-target-digg-founder-kevin-rose.html

 

[LukeDJ]

which makes the hard drive 25% faster than competing solutions.

And knowing Seagate, 25% less reliable

 

[Seventh Reign]

which makes the hard drive 25% faster than competing solutions.

And knowing Seagate, 25% less reliable

Dont be one of 'those' a-holes. Overall failure rates between Seagate and WD are almost exactly even 1 to 1. Do not buy into the marketing/review hype. It is ALL lies.

 

[GhostRyder]

This drive will of course cost a fortune with a survival rate like that. Though the speed part I question since I believe the WD Velociraptor Drives are faster read and write times due to the 10k RPM.

A friend of mine recently because he does not trust SSD's (due to all the reading and writing he constantly does on his machine) bought 4 (on a newegg shell shocker sale ) WD 1tb Velociraptor drives and ran them in raid. Talk about speed, that machine is flying almost as fast as my Samsung SSD while containing more data with better overall reliability.

Also as far as drive reliability goes, between WD, Seagate, and Hitachi they are all about on equal grounds as far as failures go so I would not label one as being the least reliable.

 

[Guest]

Ive had dozen hdds in the past 6 years. one has failed me a seagate. so I looked it up. they're failrate is much higher then wd. by more then x4 as much after 6 months - 1 year. (I bought another seagate before googing this) I wish I didn't I'm worried this one will die with my 3tb of data as my last one did.

 

[RustyTech]

I must be the only who who avoids WD like the plague. Every time I'm in the market for a new hd, it's always been a Seagate.
ALL the WD hd I've had, failed on me; and I do mean ALLLLLLL.
...and so far, no Seagate hd has ever failed on me.

 

[cliffordcooley]

I must be the only who who avoids WD like the plague.

You're not alone! Seagate is the only brand I have bought the last 6 years. Trust me! If I have had issues with them, I wouldn't continue to buy them.

 

[theBest11778]

HDDs are just a game of roulette. I repaired computers professional for 10 years, and besides Toshiba 2.5" HDDs, all the rest seemed random. Toshiba drives almost always failed after 1yr.

 

[Jesse]

Though the speed part I question since I believe the WD Velociraptor Drives are faster read and write times due to the 10k RPM.

More platters on the spindle + higher data density on a platter = less movement for the seek arm = faster speeds.

 

[GhostRyder]

More platters on the spindle + higher data density on a platter = less movement for the seek arm = faster speeds.

True, but I meant more along the lines of questioning worlds fastest HDD more than if the speeds are faster than the normal 7200RPM drives.

 

[Jad Chaar]

which makes the hard drive 25% faster than competing solutions.

And knowing Seagate, 25% less reliable

Dont be one of 'those' a-holes. Overall failure rates between Seagate and WD are almost exactly even 1 to 1. Do not buy into the marketing/review hype. It is ALL lies.

Trust me man, I have built tons of PCs and I always go with WD since the Seagates I used in the past had crazy failure rates. But it may have just been bad luck since @cliffordcooley has had some good luck with them. It really comes down to personal preference in the end.

More storage is always good since 4K content will take up a ton of space.

 

[TheBigFatClown]

which makes the hard drive 25% faster than competing solutions.

And knowing Seagate, 25% less reliable

I bought a 1.5TB Seagate Barracuda about 18 months ago and so far, knock on wood, no problems whatsoever. But it could die after I write this message. It could be dead now actually since its on a different computer. Oh God, I gotta go check something real quick...seeya.

 

[hopgop1]

I still have a 20gb IBM Travelstar 2.5" that works!

 

[Darth Shiv]

which makes the hard drive 25% faster than competing solutions.

And knowing Seagate, 25% less reliable

Dont be one of 'those' a-holes. Overall failure rates between Seagate and WD are almost exactly even 1 to 1. Do not buy into the marketing/review hype. It is ALL lies.

Except the 1.5TB Seagate had > 20% failure rate.

 

[Darth Shiv]

I must be the only who who avoids WD like the plague. Every time I'm in the market for a new hd, it's always been a Seagate.
ALL the WD hd I've had, failed on me; and I do mean ALLLLLLL.
...and so far, no Seagate hd has ever failed on me.

Are you buying WD Greens or Blues? Have had a Green DOA so I upgraded it to a Black. I only go for Blacks or REs nowadays for 24x7. For Seagate I've used ES.2s and had that fail on me after < 12 months. The WD Blacks have been rock solid though.

 

[Jad Chaar]

Are you buying WD Greens or Blues? Have had a Green DOA so I upgraded it to a Black. I only go for Blacks or REs nowadays for 24x7. For Seagate I've used ES.2s and had that fail on me after < 12 months. The WD Blacks have been rock solid though.

Yeah Blacks are the best. Both in value and reliability. And WD constantly updates them. The Blues are OK and the Greens are OK for bulk storage, but are overall pretty unreliable and slow from my experiences.

 

[captaincranky]

HDDs are just a game of roulette. I repaired computers professional for 10 years, and besides Toshiba 2.5" HDDs, all the rest seemed random. Toshiba drives almost always failed after 1yr.

My experience has been that their optical drives are trash as well.

Which reminds me, there are probably one of each in my Toshiba laptop. Oh well, I suppose the fact I hardly ever use it, will help stave off disaster.

 

[Steve]

which makes the hard drive 25% faster than competing solutions.

And knowing Seagate, 25% less reliable

Dont be one of 'those' a-holes. Overall failure rates between Seagate and WD are almost exactly even 1 to 1. Do not buy into the marketing/review hype. It is ALL lies.

Except the 1.5TB Seagate had > 20% failure rate.

I am not impressed with Seagate recently. Last year I built a file server with 10 Seagate 3TB drives and 10 WD 3TB drives. They aren’t accessed heavily and unbelievably 4 of the 10 Seagate drives are dead, all the WD drives are still working. The Seagate drives failed from the tick of death.

 

[captaincranky]

The Seagate drives failed from the tick of death.

OK, here I would have gone with the more picturesque and darker colloquial term, "death rattle".

If the WD 160GB Caviar Blue in my eMachines is any indication, Western Digital's drives do wear like iron, That one's 9+ and still going strong. I've bought into the hype and always buy the "black" models though.

I think Seagate chopped their warranties to offer savings over WD in the market, but it appears they may have renounced some quality control as well.

This drive will of course cost a fortune with a survival rate like that. Though the speed part I question since I believe the WD Velociraptor Drives are faster read and write times due to the 10k RPM.

The V-Raps are faster in random access and short read/write sessions. I think they're about on par with 7200 RPM drives in big copy and paste operations.

I've taken to using them as system drives as well. My latest i3 / 600GB V-Rap w/ 1600Mhz RAM is pretty darn peppy, at least it seems so to an old man such as myself

 

[captaincranky]

More platters on the spindle + higher data density on a platter = less movement for the seek arm = faster speeds.

I always start to question the wisdom of such large storage devices. After the storage density gets to a point (?), I think that manufacturing tolerances and operating environment could become more of an issue.

I mean, it seems to have worked out thus far, as in, CD to DVD, DVD to Blu-Ray storage capacities. But I have to wonder at what point machining tolerances, will reach their practical limits.

At some point, the slop and the tolerances in the moving parts, may be equal to, or greater than, the distance needed to travel to the next data block.

The, (seemingly), escalating failure rate of Seagate's larger drives, may be an indicator of this, as well as a harbinger of bad things to come.

 

[likedamaster]

HDDs are just a game of roulette. I repaired computers professional for 10 years, and besides Toshiba 2.5" HDDs, all the rest seemed random. Toshiba drives almost always failed after 1yr.

I can confirm this. Toshiba after one year exactly they fail. Every. Single. One.

Didn't they purchase Western Digital, and are now using WD hard drives just putting their name on it?

 

[Evernessince]

I can confirm this. Toshiba after one year exactly they fail. Every. Single. One.

Didn't they purchase Western Digital, and are now using WD hard drives just putting their name on it?

Had plenty of Toshiba drives myself and haven't had a failure yet. According to Blackblaze they are pretty reliable on average. Not like it would matter, I always torture test my drives before I put them into use. 3 days of writing data onto a drive and verifying it's integrity catches 95% of defective drives.

 

[likedamaster]

Had plenty of Toshiba drives myself and haven't had a failure yet. According to Blackblaze they are pretty reliable on average. Not like it would matter, I always torture test my drives before I put them into use. 3 days of writing data onto a drive and verifying it's integrity catches 95% of defective drives.

5 years later, Toshiba drives have definitely changed. I've had many hard drives from Toshiba throughout the years before original post(5 years ago lol) and 100% of them failed. Thanks for reply.