Re: [H] Seagate Barracuda 7200.10
I think the real challenge for the 15k.5 is to defeat the reigning 15krpm champ for server performance - the Maxtor Atlas 15K II, at least according to storagereview. On hardware alone, a current gen 15krpm should be marginally faster than the latest raptor, however their firmwares are not tuned to desktop speed and would be pointless to do otherwise. From: Greg Sevart [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: The Hardware List hardware@hardwaregroup.com To: The Hardware List hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 11:30:36 -0500 It'll be interesting to see if the 15K.5 is able to trump the WD1500ADFD in single-user performance, as the lowly 10k Raptor completely destroys the 15K.4...and all other SCSI drives, regardless of price or spindle speed. It does, of course, lag significantly behind in multi-user performance. I always find it funny when people believe that because they are enthusiasts/power users, their usage more closely reflects server/multi-user usage. Nothing could be less accurate. Power users don't use hard drives much different...they just use them more. If it is a single-user maxifast box, you'd be better served by a 1500ADFD than anything else ATM. RAID0 them if you want...though that, too, provides minimal single-user performance improvements for typical access patterns. There are select few situations in which STR is really that important. Video editing is the only one I think of off hand. Even then, two drives can often be faster, depending on what you're doing... Greg - Original Message - From: James Boswell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: The Hardware List hardware@hardwaregroup.com Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 11:11 AM Subject: Re: [H] Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 Yeah, it's a bitch on a cost/capacity basis If I ever build a system on a 'goes maximumfast, nevermind the price' basis though it's so getting one of those or whatever the then equivalent is as the system drive. hmm, wonder if Intel chipsets in the next few years will be able to handle SAS disks... I know SAS controllers can handle SATA drives... hmm (If Intels chipsets gained the ability to handle them, you could drop one straight into a Mac Pro and stash your OSX and Windows boot partitions on it. hmm... ) On 21 Apr 2006, at 13:57:200, Greg Sevart wrote: Saw that too. (actually, 15k.5...) The problem is that I've always preferred capacity over speed. 750GB 7200.10 vs. 73GB 15K.5 for the same price...yeah, I'll take 10x the storage any day. The sad thing is that the real place where these drives will be primarily used (servers) take almost no advantage of the insane STR they offer. Greg -_-_ James Boswell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ : 1653327 | AIM : TorazChryx MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [H] Seagate Barracuda 7200.10
They also announced a 15k.4 Cheetah last week, 300GB, 15k RPM spindle, 16MB cache... and 125MB/s sustained transfer rate HOLY MOLEY http://tomshardware.co.uk/2006/04/17/ segate_announces_cheetah_perpendicular/ On 21 Apr 2006, at 05:28:150, Greg Sevart wrote: Just found out about this... Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 announced at a flagship 750GB capacity in four platters, with rumors and strong speculation of a 5-platter, 960GB design in progress. 750GB availability slated for early next month. Bloody hell. http://www.seagate.com/docs/pdf/datasheet/disc/ ds_barracuda_7200_10.pdf http://www.excaliberpc.com/SEAGATE_750GB_Int_3.5-in_SATA_3G/ ST3750640AS/partinfo-id-565413.html Greg -_-_ James Boswell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ : 1653327 | AIM : TorazChryx MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [H] Seagate Barracuda 7200.10
Saw that too. (actually, 15k.5...) The problem is that I've always preferred capacity over speed. 750GB 7200.10 vs. 73GB 15K.5 for the same price...yeah, I'll take 10x the storage any day. The sad thing is that the real place where these drives will be primarily used (servers) take almost no advantage of the insane STR they offer. Greg - Original Message - From: James Boswell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: The Hardware List hardware@hardwaregroup.com Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 7:11 AM Subject: Re: [H] Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 They also announced a 15k.4 Cheetah last week, 300GB, 15k RPM spindle, 16MB cache... and 125MB/s sustained transfer rate HOLY MOLEY http://tomshardware.co.uk/2006/04/17/ segate_announces_cheetah_perpendicular/ On 21 Apr 2006, at 05:28:150, Greg Sevart wrote: Just found out about this... Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 announced at a flagship 750GB capacity in four platters, with rumors and strong speculation of a 5-platter, 960GB design in progress. 750GB availability slated for early next month. Bloody hell. http://www.seagate.com/docs/pdf/datasheet/disc/ ds_barracuda_7200_10.pdf http://www.excaliberpc.com/SEAGATE_750GB_Int_3.5-in_SATA_3G/ ST3750640AS/partinfo-id-565413.html Greg -_-_ James Boswell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ : 1653327 | AIM : TorazChryx MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [H] Seagate Barracuda 7200.10
Yeah, it's a bitch on a cost/capacity basis If I ever build a system on a 'goes maximumfast, nevermind the price' basis though it's so getting one of those or whatever the then equivalent is as the system drive. hmm, wonder if Intel chipsets in the next few years will be able to handle SAS disks... I know SAS controllers can handle SATA drives... hmm (If Intels chipsets gained the ability to handle them, you could drop one straight into a Mac Pro and stash your OSX and Windows boot partitions on it. hmm... ) On 21 Apr 2006, at 13:57:200, Greg Sevart wrote: Saw that too. (actually, 15k.5...) The problem is that I've always preferred capacity over speed. 750GB 7200.10 vs. 73GB 15K.5 for the same price...yeah, I'll take 10x the storage any day. The sad thing is that the real place where these drives will be primarily used (servers) take almost no advantage of the insane STR they offer. Greg -_-_ James Boswell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ : 1653327 | AIM : TorazChryx MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [H] Seagate Barracuda 7200.10
It'll be interesting to see if the 15K.5 is able to trump the WD1500ADFD in single-user performance, as the lowly 10k Raptor completely destroys the 15K.4...and all other SCSI drives, regardless of price or spindle speed. It does, of course, lag significantly behind in multi-user performance. I always find it funny when people believe that because they are enthusiasts/power users, their usage more closely reflects server/multi-user usage. Nothing could be less accurate. Power users don't use hard drives much different...they just use them more. If it is a single-user maxifast box, you'd be better served by a 1500ADFD than anything else ATM. RAID0 them if you want...though that, too, provides minimal single-user performance improvements for typical access patterns. There are select few situations in which STR is really that important. Video editing is the only one I think of off hand. Even then, two drives can often be faster, depending on what you're doing... Greg - Original Message - From: James Boswell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: The Hardware List hardware@hardwaregroup.com Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 11:11 AM Subject: Re: [H] Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 Yeah, it's a bitch on a cost/capacity basis If I ever build a system on a 'goes maximumfast, nevermind the price' basis though it's so getting one of those or whatever the then equivalent is as the system drive. hmm, wonder if Intel chipsets in the next few years will be able to handle SAS disks... I know SAS controllers can handle SATA drives... hmm (If Intels chipsets gained the ability to handle them, you could drop one straight into a Mac Pro and stash your OSX and Windows boot partitions on it. hmm... ) On 21 Apr 2006, at 13:57:200, Greg Sevart wrote: Saw that too. (actually, 15k.5...) The problem is that I've always preferred capacity over speed. 750GB 7200.10 vs. 73GB 15K.5 for the same price...yeah, I'll take 10x the storage any day. The sad thing is that the real place where these drives will be primarily used (servers) take almost no advantage of the insane STR they offer. Greg -_-_ James Boswell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ : 1653327 | AIM : TorazChryx MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[H] Seagate Barracuda 7200.10
Just found out about this... Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 announced at a flagship 750GB capacity in four platters, with rumors and strong speculation of a 5-platter, 960GB design in progress. 750GB availability slated for early next month. Bloody hell. http://www.seagate.com/docs/pdf/datasheet/disc/ds_barracuda_7200_10.pdf http://www.excaliberpc.com/SEAGATE_750GB_Int_3.5-in_SATA_3G/ST3750640AS/partinfo-id-565413.html Greg
Re: [H] Seagate Barracuda 7200.10
I can see it now..Christmas 2010 at CompUSA: 5.3 Terabyte Seagate Killer Whale drive.$99.00 after $50.00 rebate.possible, eh?? - Original Message - From: Greg Sevart [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006 9:28 PM Subject: [H] Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 Just found out about this... Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 announced at a flagship 750GB capacity in four platters, with rumors and strong speculation of a 5-platter, 960GB design in progress. 750GB availability slated for early next month. Bloody hell. http://www.seagate.com/docs/pdf/datasheet/disc/ds_barracuda_7200_10.pdf http://www.excaliberpc.com/SEAGATE_750GB_Int_3.5-in_SATA_3G/ST3750640AS/partinfo-id-565413.html Greg
Re: [H] Seagate Barracuda 7200.10
At 12:43 AM 4/21/2006, Jeff Lane typed: I can see it now..Christmas 2010 at CompUSA: 5.3 Terabyte Seagate Killer Whale drive.$99.00 after $50.00 rebate.possible, eh?? of course there will be those of us that will want the fast version that we can stripe. ;-) --+-- Wayne D. Johnson Ashland, OH, USA 44805 http://www.wavijo.com
Re: [H] Seagate Barracuda 7200.10
The SATA version may be $150.00 - Original Message - From: Wayne Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: The Hardware List hardware@hardwaregroup.com Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006 9:53 PM Subject: Re: [H] Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 At 12:43 AM 4/21/2006, Jeff Lane typed: I can see it now..Christmas 2010 at CompUSA: 5.3 Terabyte Seagate Killer Whale drive.$99.00 after $50.00 rebate.possible, eh?? of course there will be those of us that will want the fast version that we can stripe. ;-) --+-- Wayne D. Johnson Ashland, OH, USA 44805 http://www.wavijo.com -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.4/320 - Release Date: 4/20/2006
