I was wondering what you guys think, this new 6TB Helium HDD has came out and they benchmark it, i was thinking it looks good and would go great in my NAS.
6TB helium harddrive benchmarked, will it work in my NAS?
- Thread starter tripleX
- Start date
I see that storagereview.com just did a review on it as well. If you really need 6TB in a dual-drive RAID 1 mirror configuration, this might be the way to go. But, at a launch price at $850 each, if you can do RAID 5 or better (3+ drives) you'd be better off with 3x3TB or 3x4TB for much less $.
pauls3743
Distinguished
- Dec 24, 2011
- 1,836
- 1
- 20,460
I don't see it in a NAS. Over time the helium will leak out and you will end up with a 6TB deathstar, which will fail. It's something I might consider as a data drive in a computer, as long as I have backups on other drives AND I don't mind losing this at some point. I much prefer conventional air filled storage, at least this doesn't rely on exotic gases to run.
As to the preliminary results, apart from capacity it looks to be no better than a standard 7,200rpm hard drive.
Hitachi are great for making advances in technology and getting the jump on everyone else but it usually come at the expense of something. They were first to come out with the 1TB drives, I got a pair of them, Their data transfer was around 70MB/s, had 5 platters and ran hot enough to burn your fingers if you didn't put some kind of forced cooling on them. I think they also came out with the first single platter 1TB drive, while this was another great advance in platter technology, the arm technology wasn't any better so it performed on par if not worse because it had trouble getting onto the correct tracks. I'm wary that they are bring out a 6 platter drive and filling it with helium to try and overcome some of these old problems, I think they're putting in a quick fix so they can claim bragging rights now and sell a ton of drives while a bit down the line we're looking forward to failing drives.
As to the preliminary results, apart from capacity it looks to be no better than a standard 7,200rpm hard drive.
Hitachi are great for making advances in technology and getting the jump on everyone else but it usually come at the expense of something. They were first to come out with the 1TB drives, I got a pair of them, Their data transfer was around 70MB/s, had 5 platters and ran hot enough to burn your fingers if you didn't put some kind of forced cooling on them. I think they also came out with the first single platter 1TB drive, while this was another great advance in platter technology, the arm technology wasn't any better so it performed on par if not worse because it had trouble getting onto the correct tracks. I'm wary that they are bring out a 6 platter drive and filling it with helium to try and overcome some of these old problems, I think they're putting in a quick fix so they can claim bragging rights now and sell a ton of drives while a bit down the line we're looking forward to failing drives.
That drive is really being made/sold for large server farms anyway. Maybe 400 3TB drives won't fit, but 200 6TB drives will.
Helium conducts heat *really* well and only Hydrogen has a smaller molecule. So, with good cooling it's possible. Whether they can keep that Helium in for years after the warranty expires, well that remains to be seen. I'd probably stick with the 4TB conventional drives for now.
Helium conducts heat *really* well and only Hydrogen has a smaller molecule. So, with good cooling it's possible. Whether they can keep that Helium in for years after the warranty expires, well that remains to be seen. I'd probably stick with the 4TB conventional drives for now.
pauls3743
Distinguished
- Dec 24, 2011
- 1,836
- 1
- 20,460
And when it comes to network drives I want something reliable. This is a new technology, it's reliability hasn't been proven yet. For me, Hitachi don't have a good track record when bringing out new technology. They'll get better down the line, but I would give this a skip for now, at least until Western Digital or Seagate bring something out and then I would revisit it.
P.S. Before I shut down for the night, just wanted to comment that I don't know how many drives you plan on using and how valuable your data is. If you are using 3-4 drives, RAID 5 is probably OK. Once your drive numbers get way up, RAID 6 is better because it protects against a double-drive failure. As pauls3743 has said above, reliability is unknown at this point. The specs look good, but server farms can handle multiple drive failures without a hitch. The more you have, the greater the chances are one (or more) will fail. Sorry if you know this already...
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
News Firefox user loses 7,470 opened tabs saved over two years after they can’t restore browsing session- Started by Admin
- Replies: 58
-
Question Looking to upgrade my pc for more video and photo editing with light gaming.
- Started by fuzmaster
- Replies: 3
-
News Apple debuts M4 processor in new iPad Pros with 38 TOPS on neural engine
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 80
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram