The first 750GB hard drive is going to be Seagate?

[Ubon94]

http://dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=1896

[Cyber]

http://dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=1896

http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/...042606X,00.asp

[shadow_chazzer_killer]

soon we'll have 1TB raptors...but its still a long way to see them..

[James]

Still no information on platter density....

As I said in the other thread about this (In General Hardware) Seagate is playing it extremely conservative with the new perpendicular recording technology.

They already have 160GB per platter densities without P.R., and that gives them a maximum headroom of 800GB with 5 platters.

Unless this new one is a 2 or 3 platter drive, I'm not overly impressed.

[Ubon94]

"The 750GB drive will have four platters and eight heads, just as today's 500GB drives do."

So why don't they use 160GB Platter?

[James]

Hmm....

That's 187.5GB per platter. Not bad, but not the huge increase I expected.

[Candyman]

soon we'll have 1TB raptors...but its still a long way to see them..

Doubtful on the "soon" part of that. There's a reason that 10k RPM SCSI drives haven't broken 300GB yet.

[James]

15k rpm SCSI from Seagate using the perpendicular recording as well...



And not to knock WD or anything, but so far in the perpendicular recording technology race, they are dead last.

[shadow_chazzer_killer]

Doubtful on the "soon" part of that. There's a reason that 10k RPM SCSI drives haven't broken 300GB yet.

but who know whts in store for the future...

[ksuohio]

but who know whts in store for the future...

Since they are mostly used in servers, the preference is a large quantity of drives or a small number of dense ones. For example, if you have 1TB on a SAN, it would be preferrable to have many 74g drives. It just isn't financially feasable to acheive the same IO if you have to by 20 1TB drives.