Don't forget that main memory is more than adequate as a cache for mechanical drives and the underlying technologies have improved significantly over the years as DRAMless SSDs have demanded using system RAM to prop up performance.
20+ years later, Ultra SCSI 320 is still more than fast enough for any one mechanical hard drive. Yeah yeah, I know it was always meant for multi disk arrays on a shared bus and not just a single drive. But still, it would have shocked us 25 years ago to see how much some technologies have stagnated. It's amazing hard drives are still relevant despite all the growing pains they've had with a Million x capacity growth. It really feels like we may be finally close to the end of the line with cheap flash only being ~2x the price of expensive rust. Once they hit price parity, it's pretty much over for rust going in circles.
NAND is great when you want to be able to shake it and not have a head crash. Not so great for cold storage with QLC taking over and PLC waiting in the wings.
HDDs always seem to be one step ahead of flash in terms of capacity per price, and they will continue to be. If HAMR disks actually do come out, then hard drive capacities will double to 48TB within the next year or two for only a modest increase in price, and they will continue to be the go-to method for cheap storage.
As far as transfer rate, that's just a consequence of geometry. Data density increases in three dimensions (radial density, angular density, number of platters) but transfer rate only scales with one dimension (angular density) so drives will always get slower and slower relative to their capacity over time.
This is why we need to being back the Quantum Bigfoot 5.25 inch hard drive! May as well use all those empty ROM drive bays in old cases that still have them for storing your huge collection of ... Linux ISOs.
I can buy a new X16 16TB Exos CMR drive from B&H right now for $300. Please show me where I can buy a 16TB SSD for $600. People always post this "spinning rust is almost dead, flash is only 2x the price" garbage but it's never true.
The Samsung 8 TB 870 QVO is $350 on Newegg right now. Or you could get four 4 TB QLC drives from Team Group for $560. No one's packaged that into a single 16 TB drive, but they could in theory.
I can't say that I've run into that. I've been using SSDs since 2009. I've had several that I had lying around for over five years. And all the data was still on there. And could be viewed without any issues.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
15 Comments
Back to Article
Grebuloner - Thursday, October 19, 2023 - link
Only 256MB cache on a drive that large while 512MB is already in the wild?And it's time to up the TB/year rating. All the drives seem to max out at that figure. (~9PB is a 100% writes per year total)
PeachNCream - Thursday, October 19, 2023 - link
Don't forget that main memory is more than adequate as a cache for mechanical drives and the underlying technologies have improved significantly over the years as DRAMless SSDs have demanded using system RAM to prop up performance.rtho782 - Monday, November 6, 2023 - link
Strangely the datasheet at the bottom says 512mb.wrosecrans - Thursday, October 19, 2023 - link
20+ years later, Ultra SCSI 320 is still more than fast enough for any one mechanical hard drive. Yeah yeah, I know it was always meant for multi disk arrays on a shared bus and not just a single drive. But still, it would have shocked us 25 years ago to see how much some technologies have stagnated. It's amazing hard drives are still relevant despite all the growing pains they've had with a Million x capacity growth. It really feels like we may be finally close to the end of the line with cheap flash only being ~2x the price of expensive rust. Once they hit price parity, it's pretty much over for rust going in circles.nandnandnand - Thursday, October 19, 2023 - link
NAND is great when you want to be able to shake it and not have a head crash. Not so great for cold storage with QLC taking over and PLC waiting in the wings.Threska - Thursday, October 19, 2023 - link
Maybe FeFET memory will be the solution.https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/advs.2...
The Von Matrices - Thursday, October 19, 2023 - link
HDDs always seem to be one step ahead of flash in terms of capacity per price, and they will continue to be. If HAMR disks actually do come out, then hard drive capacities will double to 48TB within the next year or two for only a modest increase in price, and they will continue to be the go-to method for cheap storage.As far as transfer rate, that's just a consequence of geometry. Data density increases in three dimensions (radial density, angular density, number of platters) but transfer rate only scales with one dimension (angular density) so drives will always get slower and slower relative to their capacity over time.
PeachNCream - Thursday, October 19, 2023 - link
This is why we need to being back the Quantum Bigfoot 5.25 inch hard drive! May as well use all those empty ROM drive bays in old cases that still have them for storing your huge collection of ... Linux ISOs.Bob Todd - Friday, October 20, 2023 - link
I can buy a new X16 16TB Exos CMR drive from B&H right now for $300. Please show me where I can buy a 16TB SSD for $600. People always post this "spinning rust is almost dead, flash is only 2x the price" garbage but it's never true.meacupla - Friday, October 20, 2023 - link
best I can find is 2TB for $80ish and 4TB for $200ishSmall Bison - Friday, October 20, 2023 - link
The Samsung 8 TB 870 QVO is $350 on Newegg right now. Or you could get four 4 TB QLC drives from Team Group for $560. No one's packaged that into a single 16 TB drive, but they could in theory.James5mith - Friday, October 20, 2023 - link
Do me a favor and test this one out: Take a 4TB SSD and write it full of data. Archive it for a year. Try and read it back.HDDs are excellent for long term archival purposes. NAND requires periodic refreshes to avoid data loss.
Threska - Saturday, October 21, 2023 - link
Tape is better, but that's even more expensive.ballsystemlord - Thursday, October 26, 2023 - link
I have to agree there.aaronwt - Wednesday, November 8, 2023 - link
I can't say that I've run into that. I've been using SSDs since 2009. I've had several that I had lying around for over five years. And all the data was still on there. And could be viewed without any issues.