• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Seagate Bringing RAID 0 Performance to Single HDD via Multi-Actuator Tech

Raevenlord

News Editor
Joined
Aug 12, 2016
Messages
3,755 (1.34/day)
Location
Portugal
System Name The Ryzening
Processor AMD Ryzen 9 5900X
Motherboard MSI X570 MAG TOMAHAWK
Cooling Lian Li Galahad 360mm AIO
Memory 32 GB G.Skill Trident Z F4-3733 (4x 8 GB)
Video Card(s) Gigabyte RTX 3070 Ti
Storage Boot: Transcend MTE220S 2TB, Kintson A2000 1TB, Seagate Firewolf Pro 14 TB
Display(s) Acer Nitro VG270UP (1440p 144 Hz IPS)
Case Lian Li O11DX Dynamic White
Audio Device(s) iFi Audio Zen DAC
Power Supply Seasonic Focus+ 750 W
Mouse Cooler Master Masterkeys Lite L
Keyboard Cooler Master Masterkeys Lite L
Software Windows 10 x64
Seagate may currently be one of the first tech companies in storage conversations due to their upcoming HAMR (Heat-Assisted Magnetic Recording) technology, which should enable 20 TB HDDs by 2020. And even though HDDs are better known for their high areal density and price/storage ratio, which is only bound to increase through the usage of HAMR, Seagate knows that areal density is hardly one of the principal bottlenecks in HDD technology. The bottleneck, as it usually is, is speed.

HDDs have an old design philosophy by now, where an actuator arm moves read/writing heads in parallel across the surface of the disk - nowadays, there are usually two heads per platter (one on the upper side, and one on the underside of it). As you might image, a given head can either read or write at one point in time - and all heads move in tandem, with different heads reading or writing across the multiple spinning discs that constitute the hard drive. This, however, means that HDD reading efficiency is lost - due to how small the 1s and 0s are on HDDs, only one head can be moved to an exact data path, with all the others moving with it, spending power and increasing the load on the actuator for nary a speed gain or minimal workload.





Seagate's solution is ingeniously simple (for us laymen looking from the outside in, naturally). Seagate is planning to install not one, but two actuator arms in HDDs, which would work entirely separately. Naturally, still only one head in each actuator would be able to read or write at any point in time, but nevertheless, this implementation would mean that there can be two HDD sections being operated on at the same time, effectively allowing for double the read and write speeds. This isn't much too different from RAID 0 configurations, really - where data from a single HDD is mirrored across two HDDs, which guarantees that the heads of each HDD can both be reading/writing the same data, thus doubling read and write speeds. This implementation by Seagate could either allow for an intra-disk RAID 0 array - or simply for a bolster to an HDD's ability to simultaneously read and write, without any performance loss - if the data you're reading and writing are on the platters supported by different actuators, naturally.



"Seagate Hard Drives are about to embark on a new exponential growth in capacity with the introduction of EAMR technologies like HAMR [Heat-Assisted Magnetic Recording]," said Aaron Ogus, Microsoft Azure Storage Architect. "In most datacenter applications the additional capacity gains cannot be effectively utilized without improvements in device IO capacity. The dual actuator technology helps unlock additional IOPS [input/output operations per second] and allows cloud providers to make effective use of the new capacity gains."



Seagate says the drives could use SAS, SATA, or NVMe interfaces, which is a boon for all kind of customers, be them enterprise or consumers. Closing this article up, this editor would like to say that these are probably the most interesting times in HDD's life in decades now. The medium really hasn't evolved all that much since its inception. However, we are now on the verge of seeing the two greatest HDD manufacturers, WD and Seagate, coming out of the gates with different technologies for the medium. HAMR and MAMR (Microwave-Assisted Magnetic Recording) can either be great for customers, with increased product differentiation according to a users' needs, or might result in one company struggling much more than the other, considering implementation difficulties of each technology. Now, with the double-actuator design that Seagate is presenting, it seems we'll have another point of differentiation sometime in the future - though this seems more like a safe bet for all manufacturers to adopt, should it prove worthy of the investment. Fun times.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site
 

TheLostSwede

News Editor
Joined
Nov 11, 2004
Messages
16,048 (2.26/day)
Location
Sweden
System Name Overlord Mk MLI
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D
Motherboard Gigabyte X670E Aorus Master
Cooling Noctua NH-D15 SE with offsets
Memory 32GB Team T-Create Expert DDR5 6000 MHz @ CL30-34-34-68
Video Card(s) Gainward GeForce RTX 4080 Phantom GS
Storage 1TB Solidigm P44 Pro, 2 TB Corsair MP600 Pro, 2TB Kingston KC3000
Display(s) Acer XV272K LVbmiipruzx 4K@160Hz
Case Fractal Design Torrent Compact
Audio Device(s) Corsair Virtuoso SE
Power Supply be quiet! Pure Power 12 M 850 W
Mouse Logitech G502 Lightspeed
Keyboard Corsair K70 Max
Software Windows 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores https://valid.x86.fr/5za05v
This would work well for sequential data once again, but not for random data. The two actuator arms would also have to be synced for some types of data, or this could in fact end up being slower than a regular hard drive. I guess it all comes down to how good they are at designing a firmware that can take advantage of this, but it seems like it's going to have an equal amount of downsides as it has upsides.
 
Joined
Aug 20, 2007
Messages
20,758 (3.41/day)
System Name Pioneer
Processor Ryzen R9 7950X
Motherboard GIGABYTE Aorus Elite X670 AX
Cooling Noctua NH-D15 + A whole lotta Sunon and Corsair Maglev blower fans...
Memory 64GB (4x 16GB) G.Skill Flare X5 @ DDR5-6000 CL30
Video Card(s) XFX RX 7900 XTX Speedster Merc 310
Storage 2x Crucial P5 Plus 2TB PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSDs
Display(s) 55" LG 55" B9 OLED 4K Display
Case Thermaltake Core X31
Audio Device(s) TOSLINK->Schiit Modi MB->Asgard 2 DAC Amp->AKG Pro K712 Headphones or HDMI->B9 OLED
Power Supply FSP Hydro Ti Pro 850W
Mouse Logitech G305 Lightspeed Wireless
Keyboard WASD Code v3 with Cherry Green keyswitches + PBT DS keycaps
Software Gentoo Linux x64
This would work well for sequential data once again, but not for random data. The two actuator arms would also have to be synced for some types of data, or this could in fact end up being slower than a regular hard drive. I guess it all comes down to how good they are at designing a firmware that can take advantage of this, but it seems like it's going to have an equal amount of downsides as it has upsides.

What if the arms were simply positioned at opposing ends of the disk platter?
 
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
344 (0.09/day)
This would work well for sequential data once again, but not for random data. The two actuator arms would also have to be synced for some types of data, or this could in fact end up being slower than a regular hard drive. I guess it all comes down to how good they are at designing a firmware that can take advantage of this, but it seems like it's going to have an equal amount of downsides as it has upsides.
I dont get what your saying.

If you have 2 independent heads for reading that means these would be better for random reads assuming the random reads were on top and bottom platters. This goes the same for sequential. It is only faster if data is on the top and bottom. If all the data is on the top than it isn't any faster.

Basically this doesn't function like a RAID0 (unless they design it that way). It would function like a JBOD. You could design it as either one but i was reading it as a JBOD not as a RAID0....its smarter and safer to have it run as a JBOD because if the bottom actuator died....the top data is still readable. If it is actually striping data that means if 1 actuator dies everything is lost vs if it ran as a JBOD.

I would rather see it as a JBOD personally.

Also i have been wondering how long it would take them to do this....I was asking why dont be have independent arms for each platter back in the early 2000s
 
Last edited:

TheLostSwede

News Editor
Joined
Nov 11, 2004
Messages
16,048 (2.26/day)
Location
Sweden
System Name Overlord Mk MLI
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D
Motherboard Gigabyte X670E Aorus Master
Cooling Noctua NH-D15 SE with offsets
Memory 32GB Team T-Create Expert DDR5 6000 MHz @ CL30-34-34-68
Video Card(s) Gainward GeForce RTX 4080 Phantom GS
Storage 1TB Solidigm P44 Pro, 2 TB Corsair MP600 Pro, 2TB Kingston KC3000
Display(s) Acer XV272K LVbmiipruzx 4K@160Hz
Case Fractal Design Torrent Compact
Audio Device(s) Corsair Virtuoso SE
Power Supply be quiet! Pure Power 12 M 850 W
Mouse Logitech G502 Lightspeed
Keyboard Corsair K70 Max
Software Windows 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores https://valid.x86.fr/5za05v
I dont get what your saying.

If you have 2 independent heads for reading that means these would be better for random reads assuming the random reads were on top and bottom platters. This goes the same for sequential. It is only faster if data is on the top and bottom. If all the data is on the top than it isn't any faster.

Basically this doesn't function like a RAID0 (unless they design it that way). It would function like a JBOD. You could design it as either one but i was reading it as a JBOD not as a RAID0....its smarter and safer to have it run as a JBOD because if the bottom actuator died....the top data is still readable. If it is actually striping data that means if 1 actuator dies everything is lost vs if it ran as a JBOD.

I would rather see it as a JBOD personally.

Also i have been wondering how long it would take them to do this....I was asking why dont be have independent arms for each platter back in the early 2000s

Since when have hard drives been good for random data? Even this isn't going to help random access scenarios, but it would potentially help speed up sequential data in the same way RAID 0 would. Sure, if the random data is written to both parts of the drive, we might go from less than 1MB/s to 1.5MB/s, but that's hardly going to revolutionise hard drive storage.

I never said it would be like RAID 0, that was the author of the article.

The problem with individual arms is fitting all the actuators, as they take up a fair amount of space and they also add a fair amount of cost and complexity, which is most likely why no-one's done it.

What if the arms were simply positioned at opposing ends of the disk platter?

You want a return to 5.25" drives? That would most likely not fit in current form factors.
 

Ebo

Joined
May 9, 2013
Messages
778 (0.19/day)
Location
Nykoebing Mors, Denmark
System Name the little fart
Processor AMD Ryzen 2600X
Motherboard MSI x470 gaming plus
Cooling Noctua NH-C14S
Memory 16 GB G.Skill Ripjaw 2400Mhz DDR 4
Video Card(s) Sapphire RX Vega 56 Pulse
Storage 1 Crucial MX100 512GB SSD,1 Crucial MX500 2TB SSD, 1 1,5TB WD Black Caviar, 1 4TB WD RED HD
Display(s) IIyama XUB2792QSU IPS 2560x1440
Case White Lian-Li PC-011 Dynamic
Audio Device(s) Asus Xonar SE pci-e card
Power Supply Thermaltake DPS G 1050 watt Digital PSU
Mouse Steelseries Sensei
Keyboard Corsair K70
Software windows 10 64 pro bit
For server parks I can see the benefit, but for consumers in general( like you and me) absolutely nothing, just more moving parts which can fail due to density between plates.
 
Joined
Aug 20, 2007
Messages
20,758 (3.41/day)
System Name Pioneer
Processor Ryzen R9 7950X
Motherboard GIGABYTE Aorus Elite X670 AX
Cooling Noctua NH-D15 + A whole lotta Sunon and Corsair Maglev blower fans...
Memory 64GB (4x 16GB) G.Skill Flare X5 @ DDR5-6000 CL30
Video Card(s) XFX RX 7900 XTX Speedster Merc 310
Storage 2x Crucial P5 Plus 2TB PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSDs
Display(s) 55" LG 55" B9 OLED 4K Display
Case Thermaltake Core X31
Audio Device(s) TOSLINK->Schiit Modi MB->Asgard 2 DAC Amp->AKG Pro K712 Headphones or HDMI->B9 OLED
Power Supply FSP Hydro Ti Pro 850W
Mouse Logitech G305 Lightspeed Wireless
Keyboard WASD Code v3 with Cherry Green keyswitches + PBT DS keycaps
Software Gentoo Linux x64
You want a return to 5.25" drives? That would most likely not fit in current form factors.

If it improves HDD performance?

Yes.

That aside, I would assume we are capable of making things a lot smaller than what we were able to do when we made 5.25" drives.

Of course eventually pesky physics get in the way...
 

Nehemoth

New Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2017
Messages
7 (0.00/day)
Since when have hard drives been good for random data? Even this isn't going to help random access scenarios, but it would potentially help speed up sequential data in the same way RAID 0 would. Sure, if the random data is written to both parts of the drive, we might go from less than 1MB/s to 1.5MB/s, but that's hardly going to revolutionise hard drive storage.

I never said it would be like RAID 0, that was the author of the article.

The problem with individual arms is fitting all the actuators, as they take up a fair amount of space and they also add a fair amount of cost and complexity, which is most likely why no-one's done it.



You want a return to 5.25" drives? That would most likely not fit in current form factors.

I do undertand what @TheLostSwede is saying. Even if the actuators are as oppose end it would need a firmware that allow to divide the data in this new way, and for once I wonder if this wouldn't cause fragmentation.
 
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
344 (0.09/day)
Since when have hard drives been good for random data? Even this isn't going to help random access scenarios, but it would potentially help speed up sequential data in the same way RAID 0 would. Sure, if the random data is written to both parts of the drive, we might go from less than 1MB/s to 1.5MB/s, but that's hardly going to revolutionise hard drive storage.

I never said it would be like RAID 0, that was the author of the article.

The problem with individual arms is fitting all the actuators, as they take up a fair amount of space and they also add a fair amount of cost and complexity, which is most likely why no-one's done it.



You want a return to 5.25" drives? That would most likely not fit in current form factors.

You seem to be very special. You stated RAID0 does not affect random and that it most likely hurts it when it comes to HDDs. That is patently false but nice try back tracking and goal post shifting. RAID 0 should result in 1-2x random just like sequential reads/writes should be 1-2x depending on how the data is laid out for HDDs.

If it improves HDD performance?

Yes.

That aside, I would assume we are capable of making things a lot smaller than what we were able to do when we made 5.25" drives.

Of course eventually pesky physics get in the way...
100% agree. For servers I don't think size perse is a huge issue when it comes to large arrays and performance.

I am curious to know how hot the whole drive would be during full load.

I dont think it would be much worse. I maybe wrong but i would assuming the spinning results in most heat and not the actuator.
 

TheLostSwede

News Editor
Joined
Nov 11, 2004
Messages
16,048 (2.26/day)
Location
Sweden
System Name Overlord Mk MLI
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D
Motherboard Gigabyte X670E Aorus Master
Cooling Noctua NH-D15 SE with offsets
Memory 32GB Team T-Create Expert DDR5 6000 MHz @ CL30-34-34-68
Video Card(s) Gainward GeForce RTX 4080 Phantom GS
Storage 1TB Solidigm P44 Pro, 2 TB Corsair MP600 Pro, 2TB Kingston KC3000
Display(s) Acer XV272K LVbmiipruzx 4K@160Hz
Case Fractal Design Torrent Compact
Audio Device(s) Corsair Virtuoso SE
Power Supply be quiet! Pure Power 12 M 850 W
Mouse Logitech G502 Lightspeed
Keyboard Corsair K70 Max
Software Windows 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores https://valid.x86.fr/5za05v
You seem to be very special. You stated RAID0 does not affect random and that it most likely hurts it when it comes to HDDs. That is patently false but nice try back tracking and goal post shifting. RAID 0 should result in 1-2x random just like sequential reads/writes should be 1-2x depending on how the data is laid out for HDDs.

I'm sorry, what? Nowhere in my first post does it say RAID, I think you need to learn to read or put on your glasses. The only one talking about this working like RAID-0 is the news poster, not me. Get your facts right before accusing people of things.

What if the arms were simply positioned at opposing ends of the disk platter?

Looks like good old Conner did it way back in the day, but it seems like it was never available to the general public, as I can't remember this ever having been marketed or sold.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conner_Peripherals#Performance_issues_and_the_"Chinook"_dual-actuator_drive
 
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
3,448 (0.71/day)
Processor AMD 5900x
Motherboard Asus x570 Strix-E
Cooling Hardware Labs
Memory G.Skill 4000c17 2x16gb
Video Card(s) RTX 3090
Storage Sabrent
Display(s) Samsung G9
Case Phanteks 719
Audio Device(s) Fiio K5 Pro
Power Supply EVGA 1000 P2
Mouse Logitech G600
Keyboard Corsair K95
This would work well for sequential data once again, but not for random data. The two actuator arms would also have to be synced for some types of data, or this could in fact end up being slower than a regular hard drive. I guess it all comes down to how good they are at designing a firmware that can take advantage of this, but it seems like it's going to have an equal amount of downsides as it has upsides.

Because you know more about storage than Seagate?
 
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
3,208 (1.23/day)
Location
North East Ohio, USA
System Name My Ryzen 7 7700X Super Computer
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 7700X
Motherboard Gigabyte B650 Aorus Elite AX
Cooling DeepCool AK620 with Arctic Silver 5
Memory 2x16GB G.Skill Trident Z5 NEO DDR5 EXPO (CL30)
Video Card(s) XFX AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE
Storage Samsung 980 EVO 1 TB NVMe SSD (System Drive), Samsung 970 EVO 500 GB NVMe SSD (Game Drive)
Display(s) Acer Nitro XV272U (DisplayPort) and Acer Nitro XV270U (DisplayPort)
Case Lian Li LANCOOL II MESH C
Audio Device(s) On-Board Sound / Sony WH-XB910N Bluetooth Headphones
Power Supply MSI A850GF
Mouse Logitech M705
Keyboard Steelseries
Software Windows 11 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores https://valid.x86.fr/liwjs3
Because you know more about storage than Seagate?
Considering Seagate's reliability is shit, it appears even Seagate doesn't know data.

Seagate: cause your data? f**k it.

Friends don't let friends buy Seagate.
 
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
344 (0.09/day)
I'm sorry, what? Nowhere in my first post does it say RAID, I think you need to learn to read or put on your glasses. The only one talking about this working like RAID-0 is the news poster, not me. Get your facts right before accusing people of things.



Looks like good old Conner did it way back in the day, but it seems like it was never available to the general public, as I can't remember this ever having been marketed or sold.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conner_Peripherals#Performance_issues_and_the_"Chinook"_dual-actuator_drive
This would work well for sequential data once again, but not for random data. The two actuator arms would also have to be synced for some types of data, or this could in fact end up being slower than a regular hard drive. I guess it all comes down to how good they are at designing a firmware that can take advantage of this, but it seems like it's going to have an equal amount of downsides as it has upsides.

either way what you said was total BS. So keep trying to save face buddy :roll:
Since when have hard drives been good for random data? Even this isn't going to help random access scenarios, but it would potentially help speed up sequential data in the same way RAID 0 would. Sure, if the random data is written to both parts of the drive, we might go from less than 1MB/s to 1.5MB/s, but that's hardly going to revolutionise hard drive storage.
still goal post shifting to save face...and making things up as you go. :laugh:

If my server wasn't busy ATM I could run a simple test and show you are making things up but i have to many things running ATM and not enough open slots to play around...all my bays are full on my Norco 4224 TT...well minus one...because its dead :shadedshu:
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2013
Messages
5,453 (1.42/day)
Location
Everywhere all the time all at once
System Name The Little One
Processor i5-11320H @4.4GHZ
Motherboard AZW SEI
Cooling Fan w/heat pipes + side & rear vents
Memory 64GB Crucial DDR4-3200 (2x 32GB)
Video Card(s) Iris XE
Storage WD Black SN850X 4TB m.2, Seagate 2TB SSD + SN850 4TB x2 in an external enclosure
Display(s) 2x Samsung 43" & 2x 32"
Case Practically identical to a mac mini, just purrtier in slate blue, & with 3x usb ports on the front !
Audio Device(s) Yamaha ATS-1060 Bluetooth Soundbar & Subwoofer
Power Supply 65w brick
Mouse Logitech MX Master 2
Keyboard Logitech G613 mechanical wireless
Software Windows 10 pro 64 bit, with all the unnecessary background shitzu turned OFF !
Benchmark Scores PDQ
Well, I have 2x Seagate SSD's that have been running strong for over 2 years now, so obviously their no-moving-parts division is a bit more talented that their spinner department is, hahahaha :D
 
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
344 (0.09/day)
Well, I have 2x Seagate SSD's that have been running strong for over 2 years now, so obviously their no-moving-parts division is a bit more talented that their spinner department is, hahahaha :D
the last update from back blaze IIRC said that seagate drives are now in the "normal" range of reliability. They were real trash during the floods where they sold sub par units while the demand was super high and supply was low.
 

Kursah

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 15, 2006
Messages
14,673 (2.29/day)
Location
Missoula, MT, USA
System Name Kursah's Gaming Rig 2018 (2022 Upgrade) - Ryzen+ Edition | Gaming Laptop (Lenovo Legion 5i Pro 2022)
Processor R7 5800X @ Stock | i7 12700H @ Stock
Motherboard Asus ROG Strix X370-F Gaming BIOS 6203| Legion 5i Pro NM-E231
Cooling Noctua NH-U14S Push-Pull + NT-H1 | Stock Cooling
Memory TEAMGROUP T-Force Vulcan Z 32GB (2x16) DDR4 4000 @ 3600 18-20-20-42 1.35v | 32GB DDR5 4800 (2x16)
Video Card(s) Palit GeForce RTX 4070 JetStream 12GB | CPU-based Intel Iris XE + RTX 3070 8GB 150W
Storage 4TB SP UD90 NVME, 960GB SATA SSD, 2TB HDD | 1TB Samsung OEM NVME SSD + 4TB Crucial P3 Plus NVME SSD
Display(s) Acer 28" 4K VG280K x2 | 16" 2560x1600 built-in
Case Corsair 600C - Stock Fans on Low | Stock Metal/Plastic
Audio Device(s) Aune T1 mk1 > AKG K553 Pro + JVC HA-RX 700 (Equalizer APO + PeaceUI) | Bluetooth Earbuds (BX29)
Power Supply EVGA 750G2 Modular + APC Back-UPS Pro 1500 | 300W OEM (heavy use) or Lenovo Legion C135W GAN (light)
Mouse Logitech G502 | Logitech M330
Keyboard HyperX Alloy Core RGB | Built in Keyboard (Lenovo laptop KB FTW)
Software Windows 11 Pro x64 | Windows 11 Home x64
Only going to say this once, play nice or earn reply bans and infraction points.

Thanks! :toast:
 
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
25,559 (6.49/day)
I'm sorry, what? Nowhere in my first post does it say RAID, I think you need to learn to read or put on your glasses. The only one talking about this working like RAID-0 is the news poster, not me. Get your facts right before accusing people of things.



Looks like good old Conner did it way back in the day, but it seems like it was never available to the general public, as I can't remember this ever having been marketed or sold.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conner_Peripherals#Performance_issues_and_the_"Chinook"_dual-actuator_drive
Yes, this. After being bought out, there were prototypes for a quad actuator design. There is enough room for them on platter. It's a shame no one has done this yet in the enterprise and consumer space.
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
26,259 (4.64/day)
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2021
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X (65w eco profile)
Motherboard MSI B550 Gaming Plus
Cooling Scythe Mugen (rev 5)
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-3200 32 GiB
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT
Storage Samsung 980 Pro, Seagate Exos X20 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Nixeus NX-EDG274K (3840x2160@144 DP) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW (1440x900@60 HDMI-DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay + USB 3.2 (A+C) 3.5" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1150, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse Nixeus REVEL-X
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Home 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
About time. When I realized they weren't RAID0ing the platters, I was very disappointed. This though, this looks complicated.
 
Joined
Apr 16, 2010
Messages
3,456 (0.68/day)
Location
Portugal
System Name LenovoⓇ ThinkPad™ T430
Processor IntelⓇ Core™ i5-3210M processor (2 cores, 2.50GHz, 3MB cache), Intel Turbo Boost™ 2.0 (3.10GHz), HT™
Motherboard Lenovo 2344 (Mobile Intel QM77 Express Chipset)
Cooling Single-pipe heatsink + Delta fan
Memory 2x 8GB KingstonⓇ HyperX™ Impact 2133MHz DDR3L SO-DIMM
Video Card(s) Intel HD Graphics™ 4000 (GPU clk: 1100MHz, vRAM clk: 1066MHz)
Storage SamsungⓇ 860 EVO mSATA (250GB) + 850 EVO (500GB) SATA
Display(s) 14.0" (355mm) HD (1366x768) color, anti-glare, LED backlight, 200 nits, 16:9 aspect ratio, 300:1 co
Case ThinkPad Roll Cage (one-piece magnesium frame)
Audio Device(s) HD Audio, RealtekⓇ ALC3202 codec, DolbyⓇ Advanced Audio™ v2 / stereo speakers, 1W x 2
Power Supply ThinkPad 65W AC Adapter + ThinkPad Battery 70++ (9-cell)
Mouse TrackPointⓇ pointing device + UltraNav™, wide touchpad below keyboard + ThinkLight™
Keyboard 6-row, 84-key, ThinkVantage button, spill-resistant, multimedia Fn keys, LED backlight (PT Layout)
Software MicrosoftⓇ WindowsⓇ 10 x86-64 (22H2)
GIMME QUAD-ACTUATOR RAID60 64GB/512MB 15Krpm SAS SSHD NOW!! :laugh:
 
Joined
Dec 20, 2016
Messages
107 (0.04/day)
Location
Italy
System Name Frankenstin 2.0, Alienware X17 R2
Processor Ryzen 5 3600 @ 4400mhz, 1,248v fixed
Motherboard Fatal1ty B450 Gaming-ITX/ac
Cooling Swiftech Apogee drive 2 + XSPC x360 + generic GPU Waterblock
Memory 32Gb G.skill 3200 cl16
Video Card(s) Powercolor RX Vega 56, Custom watercooling - @ 64 mod
Storage Sabrent Rocket 1TB NVME
Display(s) Samsung LC27JG500
Case Thermaltake Core G3
Audio Device(s) Integrated + Denon AVR 2800
Power Supply Enermax Revolution SFX 650w
Mouse Trust GXT 152
Keyboard Logitech G413
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
Can someone explain why, when an hdd has two platters, can't they be arranged in a raid 0 configuration? I mean it seems pretty easy, reading heads are already synced. A dual platter hdd could have double the sequential speed of a single platter. Thanks
 
Joined
Dec 6, 2005
Messages
10,881 (1.62/day)
Location
Manchester, NH
System Name Senile
Processor I7-4790K@4.8 GHz 24/7
Motherboard MSI Z97-G45 Gaming
Cooling Be Quiet Pure Rock Air
Memory 16GB 4x4 G.Skill CAS9 2133 Sniper
Video Card(s) GIGABYTE Vega 64
Storage Samsung EVO 500GB / 8 Different WDs / QNAP TS-253 8GB NAS with 2x10Tb WD Blue
Display(s) 34" LG 34CB88-P 21:9 Curved UltraWide QHD (3440*1440) *FREE_SYNC*
Case Rosewill
Audio Device(s) Onboard + HD HDMI
Power Supply Corsair HX750
Mouse Logitech G5
Keyboard Corsair Strafe RGB & G610 Orion Red
Software Win 10
I would rather see it as a JBOD personally.

Well, you can either get speed via Raid 0, or more disk space via JBOD, but not both. In either case, both have the downside of being twice as likely to fail, bringing ALL of the data on the disks down with it.

I think it's a stupid idea. The only plus side is not having two physical hard drives.
 
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
25,559 (6.49/day)
GIMME QUAD-ACTUATOR RAID60 64GB/512MB 15Krpm SAS SSHD NOW!! :laugh:
Drop the SAS part and I'm in!
Can someone explain why, when an hdd has two platters, can't they be arranged in a raid 0 configuration? I mean it seems pretty easy, reading heads are already synced. A dual platter hdd could have double the sequential speed of a single platter. Thanks
You would not be incorrect.
 
Joined
Jan 29, 2012
Messages
6,431 (1.44/day)
Location
Florida
System Name natr0n-PC
Processor Ryzen 5950x/5600x
Motherboard B450 AORUS M
Cooling EK AIO 360 - 6 fan action
Memory Patriot - Viper Steel DDR4 (B-Die)(4x8GB)
Video Card(s) EVGA 3070ti FTW
Storage Various
Display(s) PIXIO IPS 240Hz 1080P
Case Thermaltake Level 20 VT
Audio Device(s) LOXJIE D10 + Kinter Amp + 6 Bookshelf Speakers Sony+JVC+Sony
Power Supply Super Flower Leadex III ARGB 80+ Gold 650W
Software XP/7/8.1/10
Benchmark Scores http://valid.x86.fr/79kuh6
More parts = more failures.
 
Top