CEO of Seagate: Nobody uses SSDs for storage

[Atmos]

But hitachi drives are more likely to fail. Or was it Toshiba?

 

Toshiba does, hitachi has like, the lowest failure rate of all harddrive manufacturers, well, HGST does, but they're the same thing really.

[fringie]

I am apparently nobody ..

 

I have a 500gb ssd and a 1tb WD green drive. I put crazy ass huge games/games I never play on the HDD and everything else INCLUDING storage onto my SSD.. For me 500GB is more than enough. That being said I don't have all my games installed because I don't play them all and I have good enough internet to download them fairly quickly if I get an urge; GTA V for example is more storage than I'd use if I had no games/video files on my PC.

[bomerr]

SSDs have already replaced HDDs for mainstream storage. In terms of regular end-users, only power-users--gamers and renderers--need the space HDDs provide. 

 

In the corporate environment, HDDs still make sense for storing large amounts of data. However they are already starting to convert some servers to SSDs for storage where fast read/write speeds matter. 

 

idk. kinda true for me. i don't see myself owning an ssd anytime soon. i'll stick to trusty old hdds.

If you are still using an HDD for a boot drive I feel sorry for you. It's not just the boot up time that's better with an SSD, the entire OS is snapper and more responsive. 

 

Also I've owned over 20 HDDs since ~1995 and at least half have failed on me, I'll trust a name brand SSD (like samsung) any day of the week over a HDD. In fact at this point I will always keep at least 2 HDDs and mirror the information as a backup. 

 

Yeah I wouldn't be doing that either on that many PCs. I'll never look back at HDD for boot drives ever again. It pains me whenever I have to use one now, they just make the system slow and unresponsive.

 

Hmm ghetto building, makes me want to grab my old LGA 775 Q6400 and see if I have enough stuff lying around to build a decent PC

I just built a Q9400 rig. The 750 TI gets bottlenecked by the CPU hard. not worth it imo unless it's a mobo/sc2/csgo machine. 

 

[Notional]

They do, but they don't make the flash chips. Or the controller. And their drives are not shitty. If anything, they're better than WD for better prices

 

So they essentially just rebrands OEM's? Or is it more like they set the spec and others make it?

 

They are pretty damn shitty.. Used to only buy Seagate, they get really hot, included my infamous 1TB 7200.11 HDD, which is the only HDD I've ever had die on me (and I even had a 10 GB Maxtor). Then I get my first WD, a 2TB black drive. It's much cooler, quieter, and seemingly more stable. Never Seagate again.

Then again, I might never buy an HDD again, as SSD's will plummet in price for larger sizes soon anyways.

[bpw87]

I am currently working on a LGA 775 Pentium Dual Core E5200 (Got for free)

and a Radeon X300se

and an Intel desktop board w/ 2GB's of ram

2 80GB IDE HDD

1 SATA DVD Burner.

AND A DESK ORGANISER!!!!

I'll have to make sure it's all still there but I also had an MSI board, 4GB of 800mhz ram and 9800GX2 but it started PC started BSOD so something was stuffing up. Was a beast computer back in the day.

[Syntaxvgm]

 

SSDs have already replaced HDDs for mainstream storage. In terms of regular end-users, only power-users--gamers and renderers--need the space HDDs provide. 

 

In the corporate environment, HDDs still make sense for storing large amounts of data. However they are already starting to convert some servers to SSDs for storage where fast read/write speeds matter. 

 

If you are still using an HDD for a boot drive I feel sorry for you. It's not just the boot up time that's better with an SSD, the entire OS is snapper and more responsive. 

 

Also I've owned over 20 HDDs since ~1995 and at least half have failed on me, I'll trust a name brand SSD (like samsung) any day of the week over a HDD. In fact at this point I will always keep at least 2 HDDs and mirror the information as a backup. 

 

I just built a Q9400 rig. The 750 TI gets bottlenecked by the CPU hard. not worth it imo unless it's a mobo/sc2/csgo machine. 

 

It's a good point that most users don't actually need much space. 

And I'd prefer all laptops came with small SSDs for that sake of inexperienced users, making them drop proof ect. 

 

But, except in small form factor laptops, they HAVEN'T replaced mechanical hard drives sadly. Reason is place like best buy put disk space, ram, and "i7" on the price card as the only metric to compare test systems by. 500GB sure looks better to shoppers than 250GB even if the latter is an SSD. 

[terrytek]

 

SSDs have already replaced HDDs for mainstream storage. In terms of regular end-users, only power-users--gamers and renderers--need the space HDDs provide. 

 

In the corporate environment, HDDs still make sense for storing large amounts of data. However they are already starting to convert some servers to SSDs for storage where fast read/write speeds matter. 

 

If you are still using an HDD for a boot drive I feel sorry for you. It's not just the boot up time that's better with an SSD, the entire OS is snapper and more responsive. 

 

Also I've owned over 20 HDDs since ~1995 and at least half have failed on me, I'll trust a name brand SSD (like samsung) any day of the week over a HDD. In fact at this point I will always keep at least 2 HDDs and mirror the information as a backup. 

 

I just built a Q9400 rig. The 750 TI gets bottlenecked by the CPU hard. not worth it imo unless it's a mobo/sc2/csgo machine. 

 

Don't feel sorry for me. I don't care if it takes forever to boot up. As long as it does boot up, i'm happy.

 

So they essentially just rebrands OEM's? Or is it more like they set the spec and others make it?

 

They are pretty damn shitty.. Used to only buy Seagate, they get really hot, included my infamous 1TB 7200.11 HDD, which is the only HDD I've ever had die on me (and I even had a 10 GB Maxtor). Then I get my first WD, a 2TB black drive. It's much cooler, quieter, and seemingly more stable. Never Seagate again.

Then again, I might never buy an HDD again, as SSD's will plummet in price for larger sizes soon anyways.

Probably just your bad luck with Seagate. It's the exact opposite for me. Every single WD drive i've had has died on me. I bought one last year to replace my 200GB Maxtor drive as a boot HDD. Died. Everything gone. NEver going back with that shitty brand. And plus, my dad works for seagate, so he gets employee discounts. sure i'm biased towards seagate, but t's not because my dad works for them. it's bc of experience.

[Dabombinable]

i've had 13 year old hard drives run to this day 24/7.

 

nope. speaking the whole truth.

Woop, 23 year old AC280-used as a boot drive until 2009. Retired officially 2010 and now its my shits and giggles DOS/Win 3.1/Win 95 HDD.

[mr moose]

Has anyone seen ssd's in a commercial storage setup, like a sans? 

[itachipirate]

I can agree with that statement mostly. If you think about it, most computer that exist in the world are for businesses and non-personal use. How many office computers have you used that even had any solid storage? They need to think about what they sell, and what their largest customer base is. Prices for SSDs will have to come down a lot for people to use them for all PC storage

[Notional]

Don't feel sorry for me. I don't care if it takes forever to boot up. As long as it does boot up, i'm happy.

 

Probably just your bad luck with Seagate. It's the exact opposite for me. Every single WD drive i've had has died on me. I bought one last year to replace my 200GB Maxtor drive as a boot HDD. Died. Everything gone. NEver going back with that shitty brand. And plus, my dad works for seagate, so he gets employee discounts. sure i'm biased towards seagate, but t's not because my dad works for them. it's bc of experience.

 

It's not just faster boot time, but faster startup time for all software you initiate while in Windows. Also as he states, everything feels more snappier, as it respons faster.

 

As for my Seagate drive, it wasn't bad luck, but an infamously shitty defective firmware. Afaik it was a countdown error, that would initiate eventually, meaning about 100% of all drives would brick themselves after some time. For most that happened after 1-3 months. I didn't get it until a year in.

http://techreport.com/news/16232/1tb-barracudas-failing-in-droves-users-claim

 

 

Last year (I believe) I hacked the drive with a USB to serial port and restarted the drive from its locked state, so I could update the firmware. It worked! And then it died a few months later from the click of death. So yeah, no more Seagate for me. Too noisy, too hot and too unstable.

[terrytek]

Woop, 23 year old AC280-used as a boot drive until 2009. Retired officially 2010 and now its my shits and giggles DOS/Win 3.1/Win 95 HDD.

I wanna pull the HDD out of my old IBM Thinkpad 560. People don't make laptops like they used to do anymore. This thing is a bitch to take apart.

[Dabombinable]

I can agree with that statement mostly. If you think about it, most computer that exist in the world are for businesses and non-personal use. How many office computer have you used that even had any solid storage? Prices for SSDs will have to come down a lot for people to use them for all PC storage

But for older computers they are becoming a viable alternative. For example, I was able to upgrade an old laptop from a 100GB Sata 1 HDD to a 240GB SSD (fair enough the laptop itself is limited to Sata1, but the speed with small files negates the slower than possible large file speeds).

 

I wanna pull the HDD out of my old IBM Thinkpad 560. People don't make laptops like they used to do anymore. This thing is a bitch to take apart.

Just like my old Compaq Presario R300. Its a shame the RAM, HDD CPU and GPU are so far behind-they are litteally the only thing stopping me from using the laptop as a daily driver-far superior screen, sound quality, typing comfort, track pad and overall build quality than any modern laptop (and its cooling setup is insane, it managed to keep its P4 Northwood 3.2GHz stable and cool at 3.9GHz, though the power brick was at its limits)

[Notional]

Has anyone seen ssd's in a commercial storage setup, like a sans? 

 

Well....

 

[terrytek]

It's not just faster boot time, but faster startup time for all software you initiate while in Windows. Also as he states, everything feels more snappier, as it respons faster.

 

As for my Seagate drive, it wasn't bad luck, but an infamously shitty defective firmware. Afaik it was a countdown error, that would initiate eventually, meaning about 100% of all drives would brick themselves after some time. For most that happened after 1-3 months. I didn't get it until a year in.

http://techreport.com/news/16232/1tb-barracudas-failing-in-droves-users-claim

 

 

Last year (I believe) I hacked the drive with a USB to serial port and restarted the drive from its locked state, so I could update the firmware. It worked! And then it died a few months later from the click of death. So yeah, no more Seagate for me. Too noisy, too hot and too unstable.

honestly no seagate drive was ever too hot for me. my 2tb drive in my main system runs at a constant 100f (26 so C for u metric) while a WD drive in my dad's system runs as hot as 130F (40-50C i believe). And keep in mind that in both systems, there is a fan right in front of it to suck air right into the HDD. Without the fan, the WD drive could get about an extra 20F or so hotter.

[mr moose]

Well....

 

 

I knew about that, I was thinking more along the lines of serious enterprise situations, corporate data centres and the like where seagate are likely to make most of their money (because I seriously doubt keyboard warriors and enthusiast like us add much to their bottom line). 

[YT2002]

I honestly think one day our boot drive will be PCIE, M.2 or NVME and our mass storage will be SATA

[Notional]

honestly no seagate drive was ever too hot for me. my 2tb drive in my main system runs at a constant 100f (26 so C for u metric) while a WD drive in my dad's system runs as hot as 130F (40-50C i believe). And keep in mind that in both systems, there is a fan right in front of it to suck air right into the HDD. Without the fan, the WD drive could get about an extra 20F or so hotter.

 

My 80GB, 250GB and 1TB all runs (/ran)​ at about 55c with no airflow. This was even on a flat table with no heat sources anywhere near. My WD Black (which is a fast HDD), never broke 45c passively. With active cooling they run about the same, but the WD might have higher temp due to being sandwiched between the Seagates.

 

I knew about that, I was thinking more along the lines of serious enterprise situations, corporate data centres and the like where seagate are likely to make most of their money (because I seriously doubt keyboard warriors and enthusiast like us add much to their bottom line). 

 

Nah, generally too expensive. Most servers has obscene amounts of RAM and the HDD's run in fast RAID setups, so usually it's not that important. At least not for the cost.

[Sakkura]

Didn't say it wasnt. Hitachi sells drives much cheaper than seagate, and often, there is almost no difference in performance.

 

You said "seagate still has higher prices on their disks than pretty much everyone else", which isn't really true when WD, their main competitor, generally has higher prices.

 

Toshiba and Hitachi are often cheaper, but I still wouldn't say it's a general rule.

[mr moose]

My 80GB, 250GB and 1TB all runs (/ran)​ at about 55c with no airflow. This was even on a flat table with no heat sources anywhere near. My WD Black (which is a fast HDD), never broke 45c passively. With active cooling they run about the same, but the WD might have higher temp due to being sandwiched between the Seagates.

 

 

Nah, generally too expensive. Most servers has obscene amounts of RAM and the HDD's run in fast RAID setups, so usually it's not that important. At least not for the cost.

 

That's basically what I thought, but in this day and age you can never be too sure.  I would also assume that if you hit an ssd with the same write load some of the biggest companies have they might be killing more drives per day.   (youtube write 72hours of video to their servers every minute)

[Sakkura]

So they essentially just rebrands OEM's? Or is it more like they set the spec and others make it?

 

They buy LAMD controllers and NAND from whoever. Then they build SSDs from that.

[Atmos]

You said "seagate still has higher prices on their disks than pretty much everyone else", which isn't really true when WD, their main competitor, generally has higher prices.

 

Toshiba and Hitachi are often cheaper, but I still wouldn't say it's a general rule.

Well then, i retract my earlier statement about them being more expensive. I was going based off of the price on newegg, but ouletpc and amazon have them much cheaper, I would not have expected that large of a price differential in harddrive, which usually hover around the same price everywhere.

[Notional]

That's basically what I thought, but in this day and age you can never be too sure.  I would also assume that if you hit an ssd with the same write load some of the biggest companies have they might be killing more drives per day.   (youtube write 72hours of video to their servers every minute)

 

Yeah but those 72 hours don't write over previous videos, they are added to blank drives. Also when even consumer drives can take over 1 petabyte of write before the drive dies, it's not all bad. Just too expensive. Also data recovery might be an issue as well, as recovering from HDD's is a lot easier than on SSD's.

Either way, if the prices keep falling hard and drive space goes up (say 4TB SSD for like 300€), I honestly think I would go full solid state in my computer. Thanks to streaming services, drive space is really not that important anymore.

 

They buy LAMD controllers and NAND from whoever. Then they build SSDs from that.

 

Ah ok. Are they mostly b2b drives? Never seen a Seagate SSD. But since they don't make any of the key components, it really just means they are an middle man, adding cost.

[soaringchicken]

Yeah he can say that for now, but in the very (and I mean very) near future mechanical hard drives will be almost obsolete and value and speed.

[mr moose]

Yeah but those 72 hours don't write over previous videos, they are added to blank drives. Also when even consumer drives can take over 1 petabyte of write before the drive dies, it's not all bad. Just too expensive. Also data recovery might be an issue as well, as recovering from HDD's is a lot easier than on SSD's.

Either way, if the prices keep falling hard and drive space goes up (say 4TB SSD for like 300€), I honestly think I would go full solid state in my computer. Thanks to streaming services, drive space is really not that important anymore.

 

 

Ah ok. Are they mostly b2b drives? Never seen a Seagate SSD. But since they don't make any of the key components, it really just means they are an middle man, adding cost.

 

true.  In heinsight I am struggling to find a data centre that might overwrite it's data (other than security camera servers).