News Seagate: 100TB HDDs Due in 2030, Multi-Actuator Drives to Become Common

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Wikibon-SSD-less-than-HDD-in-2026.jpg
Posting a chart with no link to the source that explains any of the numbers and where they got them from is a worthless post. Price per TB varies greatly depending on capacity and you can't sum it up in a chart like the one above.
 
it seems image is from Wikipedia but what actual source is, I can't tell from what link shows. Blame Wikipedia for having their images in a different spot to their article based on other sources. Since Wikipedia use tweets as sources I wouldn't trust them anyway... I did a library tech course, I have standards lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: atomicWAR
Multi-Actuator drives is just 2 HDDs (or more) as far as I'm concerned. I'm assuming putting 2 HDDs in 1 HDD enclosure saves space and power. Performance would be about the same?
If the commands are split evenly between the two actuators, you get up to twice the performance of a single-actuator drive and when you have 100TB on spinning media, you need all the performance you can possibly get to shrink the fatal failure window during an array rebuild.
 
  • Like
Reactions: atomicWAR
I'll believe it when I see it.. If they want HDD's to continue being a mainstream thing. They are going to have to drop the price dramatically.
Still paying $99-$139 for new 4TB drives in 2021
 
In last 10 years i dont know why HDD and RAM capacity doesnt improve much.
I still have 1TB hdd produced @ 2011 and the price alsois still the same when i bought it
Part of that is because platter-based drives have certain base costs associated with manufacturing them. In terms of the materials, engineering, and shipping that go into a finished drive, it doesn't make much sense to sell new lower-capacity drives for much under $50. And since 1TB of storage has been able to fit on a single 3.5" platter since late 2011, today's single-platter 1TB desktop drives cost nearly as much to manufacture as they did then. Some gains have been made at higher capacities though, particularly since some drives are now able to fit up to 2TB per platter. It's now possible to get some 2TB drives for as little as $50, and 4TB drives for as little as $80 (if you don't mind drives utilizing slower SMR tech).

Hard drives are mainly best relegated to bulk storage now that SSDs have reached viable price levels for mainstream use, and most home and business systems don't tend to need multiple terabytes of storage. So, aside from those storing lots of video and other large data files, the market for hard drives in PCs is shrinking as people shift to SSDs, and lower capacities like 1TB generally don't make much sense for bulk data storage.

Now certainly a doubling of capacity per-platter over the course of nearly a decade isn't great compared to decades past, though that's largely down to the manufacturers running into limits with what they can do at the small scales that the data is written at. You see a similar situation with some other components like CPUs as well. Today's fastest desktop processors are typically not much more than 50% faster at most tasks than those from a decade ago on a performance-per-core basis, even if the number of cores at any given price level has roughly doubled in recent years. As for system RAM, the need for higher capacities hasn't really been growing as fast as it once was, so there's not much incentive for people to get more.

I'll believe it when I see it.. If they want HDD's to continue being a mainstream thing. They are going to have to drop the price dramatically.
Still paying $99-$139 for new 4TB drives in 2021
Realistically, the "mainstream" home and business users are moving to SSDs, as hard drives have already become obsolete as far as primary system storage goes, and the manufacturers know it doesn't really make much sense for them to compete in that market. Hard drives are now primarily relegated to servers and the more niche audience of home and business users who need lots of local storage, so I wouldn't expect pricing to dramatically improve anytime soon.

Every few years its a new "Imagine backing up that much" figure. I can remember in 1999 thinking 500mb of hdd space was too much, and in the days where the biggest files were database records, not movies, that made sense. More space just gives people new ways to waste it,
Either the date or the capacity isn't quite right. 500MB of hard drive storage would have been pretty normal for a new computer by around 1994-1995. By 1999, CD burners were already appearing in home computers that were capable of holding more data than that on an inexpensive disc, and the hard drives of new PCs were getting into the 10+GB range.
 
it seems image is from Wikipedia but what actual source is, I can't tell from what link shows. Blame Wikipedia for having their images in a different spot to their article based on other sources. Since Wikipedia use tweets as sources I wouldn't trust them anyway... I did a library tech course, I have standards lol.

 

And here is another chart from the same site that says SSD's aren't catching HDD's.
INfinidat-Gartner-chart.jpg


Difference being, this chart is from Gartner, a respected non partisan research firm, as opposed to the chart you originally posted which is the opinion of one guy probably trying to prop up his investments.
 
And here is another chart from the same site that says SSD's aren't catching HDD's.
INfinidat-Gartner-chart.jpg


Difference being, this chart is from Gartner, a respected non partisan research firm, as opposed to the chart you originally posted which is the opinion of one guy probably trying to prop up his investments.

you are wrong . the data in the other chart is legit. he is not using fake prices . he is just completing the graph into the future to predict the SSD prices .

Your chart does not contradict it , it is actually old , ends at 2019 non estimation , and estimated ends at 2024 ...
 
you are wrong . the data in the other chart is legit. he is not using fake prices . he is just completing the graph into the future to predict the SSD prices .
He claims HD's are $22.5/TB this year. You can buy 14TB enterprise drives for under $18/TB now. That's less than his estimate for 2023. That's not debatably inaccurate data on his part. He's also predicting HD prices will only drop to $13/TB by 2030. That would put Seagate's 2030 100TB drive at $1300. The highest capacity HDD's have been in the $500-700 for years, they aren't going to suddenly shoot up to $1300. On the other side, he says enterprise SSDs are at $86/TB this year. SSD's come in limited size options, the closest to 14 TB the industry uses is 15.3TB. At $86/TB, that would be $1315. If he isn't using fake prices, please link to a 15.3TB SSD for that price. The cheapest I could find from a vendor I've heard of is almost $3000. With most options over $4000 are more. Not remotely in the ballpark of his estimate. This isn't even a case where one or 2 of his numbers are inaccurate, everything on his chart is just made up.

The Gartner chart clearly states in the foot notes, that the prediction was updated in December 2020, and the chart was posted December 22, 2020. You don't need to be a chart reading expert to see that both charts have data/predictions for 2015 to 2024, and they don't match at all.
 
Multi-Actuator drives is just 2 HDDs (or more) as far as I'm concerned. I'm assuming putting 2 HDDs in 1 HDD enclosure saves space and power. Performance would be about the same?

Yes it does look like 2 drives. So a single 20TB drive with two actuator's appears as two 10TB drives, which will get you "twice" the IOPS when compared to a single 20TB drive with a single actuator.

They also want you to believe that this is some "new" technology. IBM was doing the same thing, multiple independent actuator's making a single set of platters look like multiple drives, at least back in the 80's. There could have been others before that.