Hitachi Ships 3 Drives, 3 TB Each

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Kevin Parrish
Contributor

Kevin Parrish has over a decade of experience as a writer, editor, and product tester. His work focused on computer hardware, networking equipment, smartphones, tablets, gaming consoles, and other internet-connected devices. His work has appeared in Tom's Hardware, Tom's Guide, Maximum PC, Digital Trends, Android Authority, How-To Geek, Lifewire, and others.

  • agnickolov
    Keep them coming! A bit pricey to start, but it'll drop to reasonable levels soon enough...
    Reply
  • shloader
    No mention of platter count? Reason I ask is whether Hitachi is first (1TB race) or catching up they often pack their first offerings of max capacity with about five platters @ 7200RPM. I will say the positive aspect of them joining the 3TB crowd is they put on pressure resulting in competitive pricing. No come on Samsung.
    Reply
  • dalauder
    Good point with platter count. Maximizing areal density with fewer platters results in a faster drive--but more importantly with a 3TB drive, fewer platters reduces chance of failure. Think if each platter has a 5% failure rate, your chance of failure increases dramatically with each additional platter. I too am waiting to see what Samsung brings to the table.
    Reply
  • bhtechmech
    nice but i'll stick to RAID and waiting for SSD to get bigger. Too long to recover when they fail and defrag when there that bigg.
    Reply
  • eddieroolz
    3TB...! @_@
    Reply
  • mavroxur
    3TB is a lot of data to be trusting to a Hitachi drive.... >_>
    Reply
  • The people writing these articles are absolutely horrible at details, spelling, grammar and punctuation. Unbelievable!
    Reply
  • aevm
    External 3 TB drives for $249.99, with USB 2.0? No, thanks. I'd rather spend $180 for a WDBACW0030HBK-NESN - same thing from WD but several times faster thanks to USB 3.0.

    Reply
  • archange
    bhtechmechnice but i'll stick to RAID and waiting for SSD to get bigger. Too long to recover when they fail and defrag when there that bigg.
    Hmm. Based on my usage patterns, what mostly needs defragmenting is the system drive alone.

    My system partitions are always limited to below 100 GB and so, defragging takes little time. True, I've been using striping for my main PC builds since 2004, which helps a bit and also, I forgo using a page file altogether. When I had less memory, I used a fixed size page file, to avoid unnecessary fragmentation.

    All my games go to D:\Games and based on what I've seen, they never fragment. As for torrenting, having a cache of at least 256 MB set in your client goes a long way to preventing fragmentation. Besides, if you're so worried, you can provide a separate partition or even a drive for that purpose.

    Which leaves mostly media files to be stored on a 3 TB drive. Now don't tell me these cause fragmentation, cause I don't buy it. Besides, even huge partitions containing media files are easily defragged, due to the files being large and cohesive.

    My next build will most certainly include at least an SSD for the system drive and I will probably keep my mechanical Samsung F1s in Raid 0 for whatever else (read video editing).

    My home server, however, would most definitely benefit from using 3 TB drives in a new array :)
    Reply
  • dalauder
    I'm still stuck on how awesome Samsung Spinpoint F3 1TB's are. I have 3, short stroked in RAID 0 for a 300GB system drive (RAID 5 on the rest) and I get 425MB/s across the entire drive in HD Tach and over 2GB/s burst. But 3TB drives should be quite a bit faster than this. I might have to RAID a couple when the prices drop.
    Reply