Seagate constellation/barracuda

[Bartelsh]

so i know wd sells hdd's in different colours representing different kinds of drives. so i guess thats what seagate is doing too but what do they stand for. i know barracuda is the mainstream one but what about savvio or constellation or momentus?

[CowsGoRoar]

so i know wd sells hdd's in different colours representing different kinds of drives. so i guess thats what seagate is doing too but what do they stand for. i know barracuda is the mainstream one but what about savvio or constellation or momentus?

Constellation (NAS) I think (I might be wrong), has double the livetime because it's not 7200 rpm.

[alpenwasser]

The naming scheme today has changed a bit for Seagate, but

Barracudas are normal desktop drives IIRC (the "Desktop HDD"

models), Constellation are now "Enterprise capacity" (such

as WD's Re line).

Then there is the Terascale line (new), which if I understand

correctly is a competitor to WD's Se line, and the normal

NAS drives, which are supposed to compete with WD's Red drives.

Aside from that, you also have the "Desktop SSHD" drives and

the Enterprise 10k drives (used to be the Savvio line I think)

and the Enterprise 15k drives (used to be the Cheetah line

I believe), as well as all the mobile ones and the SSDs.

The Momentus is part of the laptop SSHD line according to

their site.

If you want to know everything, I recommend checking out

their site, it's probably your most reliable source of

information on this.

[Ahnzh]

so i know wd sells hdd's in different colours representing different kinds of drives. so i guess thats what seagate is doing too but what do they stand for. i know barracuda is the mainstream one but what about savvio or constellation or momentus?

 

Constellation (NAS) I think (I might be wrong), has double the livetime because it's not 7200 rpm.

 

Barracudas are your standard desktop computer drives.

 

Constellation labeled as enterprise grade drives. They provide business relevant features like error correction, are build with a far better quality and thus will run more reliable. The added quality becomes

noticeable when looking at the data sheets (failure rates and especially unrecoverable error rates).

The error rates for desktop oriented drives will be around a minimum 11.5 TB transferred data for an unrecoverable error. For enterprise grade drives it's 10 times of that (roughly 110TB)

 

When taking a look at the current requirements it seems as if they are targeted at pro users.

Larger companies possess a failover oriented environment. For storing purposes they are building desktop grade drives into their servers because they don't care if a drive dies. They save the data with

multiple redundancies. In your server you have a RAID5/single parity or RAID6/double parity. In addition to that they run a failover server that takes over in case the whole server dies, and to be on the

safe side they even do regular backups. 

For databases or in general data that's accessed very often and drives virtual machines are running on, the drives of choice will be 10k or 15k SAS drives or even business grade SSDs to get more IOPS

since access times and accesses per second is the bottleneck in these environments.

For office computers they are simply overkill.

Even medium sized companies nowadays have a backup server, running desktop grade drives on them as well would be logical (or at least NAS oriented drives).

Small businesses won't have to handle that much data so a simple NAS or a small server with NAS oriented drives running in a RAID in combination with regular backups should do the job. 

 

So everything that's left is to build them into higher quality workstations, so pro users will be targeted.

 

Constellations are the middle way between everything. They got acceptable transfer speeds and IOPS, aren't that loud and possess a good reliability.

[IdeaStormer]

.. but what about savvio .....

 

Savio's are the 2.5" SAS drives at 10K and 15K RPM, those babies are fast. My dream storage build has a ton of these.

[alpenwasser]

Savio's are the 2.5" SAS drives at 10K and 15K RPM, those babies are fast. My dream storage build has a ton of these.

Ah, yes, Savvio is 2.5", Cheetah is 3.5"?

[terrytek]

Ah, yes, Savvio is 2.5", Cheetah is 3.5"?

I'm pretty sure Savvio is 3.5". I got 2 running in my fileserver.

[IdeaStormer]

Ah, yes, Savvio is 2.5", Cheetah is 3.5"?

 

Yup, that's what I have seen first hand.

 

I'm pretty sure Savvio is 3.5". I got 2 running in my fileserver.

 

I think you should take a double look at the writing on that drive, somebody might of switched the label. I have never seen a 3.5" Savvio.

 

OK, I see some FiberChannel and SCSI 3.5" Savvio drives

[Ahnzh]

Yup, that's what I have seen first hand.

 

 

I think you should take a double look at the writing on that drive, somebody might of switched the label. I have never seen a 3.5" Savvio.

 

OK, I see some FiberChannel and SCSI 3.5" Savvio drives

 

I'm pretty sure Savvio is 3.5". I got 2 running in my fileserver.

 

I thought 10k/15k HDDs always are 2.5" because of the centrifugal forces? ok i saw 3.5" but instead of building a larger drive they simply had cooling fins

on the sides of the drive, I don't consider this a 3.5" drive

[terrytek]

I thought 10k/15k HDDs always are 2.5" because of the centrifugal forces? ok i saw 3.5" but instead of building a larger drive they simply had cooling fins

on the sides of the drive, I don't consider this a 3.5" drive

I have a 3.5" 15K drive without cooling fins.

 

EDIT: It was an old 16GB SCSI drive. Noise was unbearable!! :angry:

[alpenwasser]

I thought 10k/15k HDDs always are 2.5" because of the centrifugal forces? ok i saw 3.5" but instead of building a larger drive they simply had cooling fins

on the sides of the drive, I don't consider this a 3.5" drive

I have a Chetah 3.5" 15k drive that I've taken apart, and indeed

the platters themselves are all 2.5", and I remember reading

somewhere that this was necessary for 15k drives in general, as

you say due to centrifugal forces. The drive enclosure is full

3.5" though. Some cooling fins, and quite a bit of space for

weights (yes, weights ).

I'm not sure about 10k drives, I think they still have 3.5"

platters. I have an old Quantum 10k SCSI drive I could take

apart if you really want to know for sure.

[Ahnzh]

I have a Chetah 3.5" 15k drive that I've taken apart, and indeed

the platters themselves are all 2.5", and I remember reading

somewhere that this was necessary for 15k drives in general, as

you say due to centrifugal forces. The drive enclosure is full

3.5" though. Some cooling fins, and quite a bit of space for

weights (yes, weights ).

I'm not sure about 10k drives, I think they still have 3.5"

platters. I have an old Quantum 10k SCSI drive I could take

apart if you really want to know for sure.

 

Thanks for the info. I never really cared about those 3.5" since they pretty much have the exact same specs as their smaller brothers.

When having the same specs, going for the smaller ones seemed the better option in general so I pretty much didn't care. But just looking

at the new SanDisk enterprise SSDs. 4TB for 2500$. Instead of investing 500$ into a 500GB 15k SAS or going for 400$ for a 600GB 10k

SAS I would opt for buying one of those. I mean, GB per $, IOPS per $, just considering that you are paying more (at least 1000$!!!!) to

get the same amount of storage space with HDDs...

 

And even if you take a look into the near future with 3D NANDs coming up, them being faster, more reliable, cheaper by roughly

30-50%, FAR more storage per inch and so on... I just see no future for SAS drives, not even in the near future.