Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News , or add us as a preferred source , to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds.
Hassam Nasir Social Links Navigation Contributing Writer Hassam Nasir is a die-hard hardware enthusiast with years of experience as a tech editor and writer, focusing on detailed CPU comparisons and general hardware news. When he’s not working, you’ll find him bending tubes for his ever-evolving custom water-loop gaming rig or benchmarking the latest CPUs and GPUs just for fun.
pug_s I really don't understand why Sata specs haven't changed since 3.0 while hard drive size increased dramatically. Clearly they could've changed the speed from 6.0gb/sec to 12gb/sec or even higher. Reply
Notton pug_s said: I really don't understand why Sata specs haven't changed since 3.0 while hard drive size increased dramatically. Clearly they could've changed the speed from 6.0gb/sec to 12gb/sec or even higher. Product segmentation; that's what SAS is for. It's not necessary because even a dual actuator 7200rpm HDD is barely capable of saturating spec. Reply
JaiJai1 pug_s said: I really don't understand why Sata specs haven't changed since 3.0 while hard drive size increased dramatically. Clearly they could've changed the speed from 6.0gb/sec to 12gb/sec or even higher. any faster and their life spans decrease. Slower lasts longer Reply
Grobe JaiJai1 said: any faster and their life spans decrease. Slower lasts longer The maximum data transfer speed of the data cable are not related to mechanical wear in any significant way. The rotation speed of the disks are. Reply
twin_savage Notton said: Product segmentation; that's what SAS is for. It's not necessary because even a dual actuator 7200rpm HDD is barely capable of saturating spec. and the main reason (besides the fact that SAS SSDs exist) for SAS getting higher speeds is because SAS expanders often run 6 HDDs per SAS lane so they need to be fast in order not to bottleneck. SATA's exquivilent to this is a complete dumpster fire that should never be used; but perhaps if the specification for port multipliers wasn't so thouroughly botched there would be more pressure for a faster revision of SATA to come out. JaiJai1 said: any faster and their life spans decrease. Slower lasts longer The exact opposite is true, but not because of the speed of the disk. The reason slow rotational rate HDDs don't last as long is because they are the worse balanced and binned components that the HDD factories come across put together. All the best balanced and binned components go into the faster or more up market HDDs. Reply
leclod "Moreover, Seagate itself has 32 TB offerings built using HAMR, but these new units all use Conventional Magnetic Recording (CMR)" CMR and HAMR aren't mutually exclusive, those 32TB drives must be HAMR drives. And of course SATA didn't evolve past SATA3 because it's useless. I haven't yet seen or heard of an HDD crossing the 300MB/s barrier. Edit : rather the 600MB/s barrier Reply
icraft SkyHawk AI for $699.99, Exos for $729.99, and the top-end IronWolf Pro for $849.99. Later in the article IronWolf Health Management for predictable health monitoring. It's priced at $729.99, so just $30 more than the SkyHawk. Finally, we have the top-end Exos 32 TB One of them is wrong Reply
twin_savage leclod said: I haven't yet seen or heard of an HDD crossing the 300MB/s barrier. I'm hitting 587MB/s on first gen mach.2 HDDs Reply
wwenze1 leclod said: "Moreover, Seagate itself has 32 TB offerings built using HAMR, but these new units all use Conventional Magnetic Recording (CMR)" CMR and HAMR aren't mutually exclusive, those 32TB drives must be HAMR drives. And of course SATA didn't evolve past SATA3 because it's useless. I haven't yet seen or heard of an HDD crossing the 300MB/s barrier. As in, the current 32TB drives are SMR HAMR. The 32TB CMR HAMR are new. Dec 2024 article https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/hdds/seagate-launches-32tb-exos-m-hard-drive-based-on-hamr-technology-mozaic-3-drives-are-the-worlds-first-generally-available-hamr-hdds "Coinciding with this, Seagate silently published the product page for its Exos M HDDs, which includes a 32TB model using the shingled magnetic recording (SMR) storage format and a 30TB model using conventional magnetic recording (CMR)." We only increased 6.7% CMR capacity after 1 year? Reply
leclod wwenze1 said: As in, the current 32TB drives are SMR HAMR. The 32TB CMR HAMR are new. I thought so too. Still, what he wrote is wrong (or poorly written). Reply
Key considerations
- Investor positioning can change fast
- Volatility remains possible near catalysts
- Macro rates and liquidity can dominate flows
Reference reading
- https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/hdds/SPONSORED_LINK_URL
- https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/hdds/seagate-launches-three-new-32-tb-hard-drives-across-its-product-lines-all-using-cmr-tech-skyhawk-ai-drive-starts-from-usd699-flagship-exos-at-usd849#main
- https://www.tomshardware.com
- This HP Omen 45L gaming PC at $1,245 off is the cheapest way to bag an RTX 5090 graphics card — massive New Year code saving makes the whole PC cheaper than buy
- Intel’s comeback weapon to fight AMD reportedly drops this spring — Core Ultra 200K Plus and 200HX Plus CPUs set for March or April launch
- U.S. slashes Taiwan tariffs in new semiconductor trade deal — Washington to reduce tariffs to 15% in exchange for $500 billion stateside manufacturing investmen
- Buying all DLC for Monster Hunter Wilds unlocks twice the FPS performance — higher FPS accidentally paywalled by resource-hogging background check for paid cont
- Trump's cryptic remark states Apple has invested in Intel — tells press 'Apple went in, Nvidia went in, a lot of smart people went in'
Informational only. No financial advice. Do your own research.