Tuesday, May 3rd 2011

Seagate Breaks Areal Density Barrier, Unveils First HDD with 1 TB per Platter

Seagate, the leader in hard drives and storage solutions, today unveiled the world’s first 3.5-inch hard drive featuring 1TB of storage capacity per disk platter, breaking the 1TB areal density barrier to help meet explosive worldwide demand for digital content storage in both the home and the office.

Seagate’s GoFlex Desk products are the first to feature the new hard drive, delivering storage capacities of up to 3TB and an areal density of 625 Gigabits per square inch, the industry’s highest. Seagate is on track to ship its flagship 3.5-inch Barracuda desktop hard drive with 3TBs of storage on 3 disk platters – enough capacity to store up to 120 high-definition movies, 1,500 video games, thousands of photos or virtually countless hours of digital music – to the distribution channel in mid-2011. The drive will also be available in capacities of 2TB, 1.5TB and 1TB.

“Organizations of all sizes and consumers worldwide are amassing digital content at light speed, generating immense demand for storage of digital content of every imaginable kind,” said Rocky Pimentel, Seagate Executive Vice President of Worldwide Sales and Marketing. “We remain keenly focused on delivering the storage capacity, speed and manageability our customers need to thrive in an increasingly digital world.”

GoFlex Desk external drives are compatible with both the Windows operating system and Mac computers. Each drive includes an NTFS driver for Mac, which allows the drive to store and access files from both Windows and Mac OS X computers without reformatting. The GoFlex Desk external drive’s sleek black 3.5-inch design sits either vertically or horizontally to accommodate any desktop environment.
Add your own comment

53 Comments on Seagate Breaks Areal Density Barrier, Unveils First HDD with 1 TB per Platter

#1
entropy13
Are there even 1,500 games released in the past 10 years? I wonder...:laugh:
Posted on Reply
#2
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Why not offer a 5 TB drive with 5 of those platters? What's with the run on 3-4 platter drives lately? Lemme guess, the industry has priced itself out of shipping 5 platter drives. :(
Posted on Reply
#3
LAN_deRf_HA
Finally. I've been holding out for 2 platter 2 TB drives. Let's see what WD comes up with and then I'll be replacing both my drives.... well in a perfect world anyways. If these drives turn out like others in the past few years they'll either be prone to massive amounts of noise or horrendous reliability. Let's hope seagate takes a quiet cue from their new samsung tech without the spotty smart data readings.
Posted on Reply
#4
_JP_
by: entropy13
Are there even 1,500 games released in the past 10 years? I wonder...:laugh:
3072 GB / 1500 games = 2,048 GB per game. Last time I checked, the 1st DiRT was around ten times that size. So they must be making an average.
Posted on Reply
#5
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
It would hold 66,666 copies of Minecraft (45 MB). XD
Posted on Reply
#6
micropage7
i just can say wow
its kinda fast when first hdd touched 1 tera now is 3 tera. sometimes it looks too much for motherboard to handle
Posted on Reply
#7
caleb
i just can say wow
Whats so wow about it? That we use the same mechanical technology for more than 30 years and they are still "improving it" lol.
I find it kinda sad we still dont get nice TB size SSD's with a decent price.
I saw this guy in a movie once and he could store other peoples mind in his neural net !
Posted on Reply
#8
theJesus
Wake me up when they hit 2tb/platter and sell single platter drives for ~$100. Then I'll buy five or six for a nice RAID 5 or 10 or something like that. Single platter drives are sexy.
Posted on Reply
#9
wolf
Performance Enthusiast
hard drives are still improving at a fantastic rate imo. good to have such clear definition between super fast read/write drives, and cheap HUGE storage drives.
Posted on Reply
#10
DanTheBanjoman
Señor Moderator
by: caleb
Whats so wow about it? That we use the same mechanical technology for more than 30 years and they are still "improving it" lol.
I find it kinda sad we still dont get nice TB size SSD's with a decent price.
I saw this guy in a movie once and he could store other peoples mind in his neural net !
I agree, I even saw this documentary about a robot from the future who came to kill some lady. And there was this computer that could think for itself and decided humans should die. Quite interesting.
I'm not sure why we don't get this tech at home.


by: wolf
hard drives are still improving at a fantastic rate imo. good to have such clear definition between super fast read/write drives, and cheap HUGE storage drives.
I disagree, improvements have been slow in the past few years. Though this is because the market for huge multi-TB disks is not that big. Not yet anyway.
Posted on Reply
#11
micropage7
by: caleb
Whats so wow about it? That we use the same mechanical technology for more than 30 years and they are still "improving it" lol.
yep with kinda same technology we can push it into now 3 tera. this is what called evolution
although the size is promising, if it fails the pain is kinda 'promising' too, the safest way maybe just place it on raid configuration
Posted on Reply
#12
blibba
I struggle to half-fill my 640GB main drive :(
Posted on Reply
#13
FreedomEclipse
~Technological Technocrat~
I bet that technology originally belonged to samsung....
Posted on Reply
#14
crazyeyesreaper
Chief Broken Rig
dosent matter who it belonged to the better density will push HDD speed up even higher

just look at the performance numbers of samsungs F4 drives of the 7200rpm variety hitting 155mb/s read write speeds. doubling the density of a 1TB drive from 500gb x2 to 1000gb x1 should give a nice bump in speed id say about 15-25mb/s improvement

The Spinpoint F3s sequential read writes were around 110-115. id expect upping them to single platter would be a nice 130-145 maybe higher so a short stroked drive 1tb reduced to say 700gb per drive x2 in Raid 0 would make for some damn damn nice numbers for mechanical hdds. as that raises the min read write do to cutting off the slowest part of the disk. so average should go up to 125 + the improvement from a single platter upping that to 150+ oh man, cant wait for the new drives and actual performance numbers.
Posted on Reply
#15
theJesus
by: DanTheBanjoman
I agree, I even saw this documentary about a robot from the future who came to kill some lady. And there was this computer that could think for itself and decided humans should die. Quite interesting.
I'm not sure why we don't get this tech at home.
Have I ever told you that I love you?
Posted on Reply
#16
Thefumigator
by: theJesus
Wake me up when they hit 2tb/platter and sell single platter drives for ~$100. Then I'll buy five or six for a nice RAID 5 or 10 or something like that. Single platter drives are sexy.
Wait a second....
Aren't single platter drives slower than multiplatter drives? (considering the platters being the same size in both cases, single and multi).

It makes me think that a drive with 2 x 1TB platters would perform similary to 2x drives of 1TB (single platter) in RAID 0. This is rational, since there's a kind of RAID 0 in between the platters of a multiplatter drive. internally I mean.

But yeah of course improving density will improve performance but I'm not discussing that in this case...
Posted on Reply
#17
digibucc
by: Thefumigator
Wait a second....
Aren't single platter drives slower than multiplatter drives?
not in general, no. the platters are linked, but the mechanics still have to read individual platters, in different spots. that slows it all down.
Posted on Reply
#18
cheesy999
no, the platters do not work the same as hard drives do in a raid set up, the 1tb f3 is actually slightly slowr then the 500gb f3
Posted on Reply
#19
Thefumigator
by: digibucc
not in general, no. the platters are linked, but the mechanics still have to read individual platters, in different spots. that slows it all down.
Now I see what that means.

I actually thought the opposite, that more platters would increase speed because the data would have been written sequencially in platter 1, platter 2, platter 3 and then platter 1, platter 2, platter 3 and so on. making lower amount if seekings for each spot as all heads are in the desired spot in that single instant. If you know what I mean (at least it this idea would work faster in sequencial readings)

Now, if they have to read individual platters in different spots, we are doomed. speeds drops. Unless the heads were independent from each other, which are not.
Posted on Reply
#20
repman244
by: FreedomEclipse
I bet that technology originally belonged to samsung....
Yes it did, just google samsung 1TB platter and it's there :)
Posted on Reply
#21
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
by: FordGT90Concept
Why not offer a 5 TB drive with 5 of those platters? What's with the run on 3-4 platter drives lately? Lemme guess, the industry has priced itself out of shipping 5 platter drives. :(
The problem with having more than 3 platters is that they hit the height limit of the drive.
Posted on Reply
#22
theJesus
by: Thefumigator
Now I see what that means.

I actually thought the opposite, that more platters would increase speed because the data would have been written sequencially in platter 1, platter 2, platter 3 and then platter 1, platter 2, platter 3 and so on. making lower amount if seekings for each spot as all heads are in the desired spot in that single instant. If you know what I mean (at least it this idea would work faster in sequencial readings)

Now, if they have to read individual platters in different spots, we are doomed. speeds drops. Unless the heads were independent from each other, which are not.
Yeah, I understand the logic you were using, but unfortunately it just doesn't work that way :ohwell:

Regardless, I also want single-platter drives because they're sleek and thin and sexy (and I imagine cooler and quieter)
Posted on Reply
#23
wiak
so where is ma 5TB hard drive?
they have the technology :P
5 platters at 1TB earch = 5TB and 5 platters are max in a 3,5" harddrive
Posted on Reply
#24
DanTheBanjoman
Señor Moderator
by: newtekie1
The problem with having more than 3 platters is that they hit the height limit of the drive.
Height limit? I thought full height meant two 5,25" bays. ie four Bigfoots stacked.
Posted on Reply
#25
erocker
by: caleb
Whats so wow about it? That we use the same mechanical technology for more than 30 years and they are still "improving it" lol.
I think the whole needle on a spinning disc has been around much longer than that.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment