Seagate & WD woes because of Thailand flooding.

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

KentState

Diamond Member
Oct 19, 2001
8,397
393
126
We got lucky at work. Been pricing out three SANs since August. The quote was started on before all of this happened and we just put the order in.
 

exdeath

Lifer
Jan 29, 2004
13,679
10
81
People still do this?

hddsucks.jpg


I'd throw my computer in the trash if I had to wait 2 hours for something so trivial as copying 8 GB.

:D

Before SSDs, I've used exclusively X15s and Raptors in my PC since the time they were only 18 GB in size and what was it $600 a pop... so can't really feel sympathy for people whining about a 1 TB HDD costing them a whopping $70 and possibly rising to a staggering $80...

Disk IO and I don't get along, even just needless hitches and lag in casual desktop use or taking an hour to install software to the sustained sound of ripping burlap and my house lit up by a solidly lit never ending HDD access light. I've got a scar on my forehead from bashing my face into my old 21" CRT whenever display properties didn't come up the exact second I lifted my finger off the mouse button, so can't say I feel for any loss of terribadlyslow mechanical HDD production. They should really just stop HDD production altogether, SSDs are already slow enough. :awe:
 
Last edited:

Locut0s

Lifer
Nov 28, 2001
22,205
43
91
People still do this?

PIC SNIPPED

I'd throw my computer in the trash if I had to wait 2 hours for something so trivial as copying 8 GB.

:D

Before SSDs, I've used exclusively X15s and Raptors in my PC since the time they were only 18 GB in size and what was it $600 a pop... so can't really feel sympathy for people whining about a 1 TB HDD costing them a whopping $70 and possibly rising to a staggering $80...

Disk IO and I don't get along, even just needless hitches and lag in casual desktop use or taking an hour to install software to the sustained sound of ripping burlap and my house lit up by a solidly lit never ending HDD access light. I've got a scar on my forehead from bashing my face into my old 21" CRT whenever display properties didn't come up the exact second I lifted my finger off the mouse button, so can't say I feel for any loss of terribadlyslow mechanical HDD production. They should really just stop HDD production altogether, SSDs are already slow enough. :awe:

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: Yes my lord

Anyway back to reality

Prices.jpg
 

groberts101

Golden Member
Mar 17, 2011
1,390
0
0
I guess I could agree with some of what exdeath said above if the average SSD was 1TB or greater. lol

Then there's the issue of what to back up the SSD's data with?

Each piece of hardware has its place and I save HUGE amounts of time whenever I transfer files to/from my 8 drive HDD array for use on my OS's 6 drive SSD array. And without redundant HDD storage to protect from that R0 risk?.. I would have to just write hundreds of DVD's/Blu-rays to back it all up(or even worse.. and move away from R0). And how much time/$$$ would that be over the years, right?

So in essence.. HDD helps us to save time and money in the long run despite their shortcomings compared to SSD. One could even go so far as to say that HDD based storage even makes using SSD's in many system's.. that much more feasible despite their comparatively tiny size.

If an SSD user knows how to seamlessly integrate the 2 technologies?.. they will have the best of both currently available worlds. One for instant OS/app/game usage.. and the other for sequential data flow. No one's ever criticized my system for still using HDD based storage.. that's for sure.

PS. Even my slowest single drive can maintain 50-60MB/s for extended periods of time and that screenshot posted above with 2MB/s transfers between volumes is not typical for most users. Your system obviously has major overhead/resource hogging issues involved there.. or the drives must be completely full.
 
Last edited:

Silenus

Senior member
Mar 11, 2008
358
1
81
...
PS. Even my slowest single drive can maintain 50-60MB/s for extended periods of time and that screenshot posted above with 2MB/s transfers between volumes is not typical for most users. Your system obviously has major overhead/resource hogging issues involved there.. or the drives must be completely full.

Let be fair though...the above sceenshot is not a single big 8GB file....it's 1.9 MILLION files. That works out to something between 4 and 5KB per file on average. In other words worst case for a spinner, but nearly best case for an SSD. Or would show the most dramatic difference in speed anyway. If that was just a few large file I'm sure the hard drive would be quite a bit faster.
 

exdeath

Lifer
Jan 29, 2004
13,679
10
81
Let be fair though...the above sceenshot is not a single big 8GB file....it's 1.9 MILLION files. That works out to something between 4 and 5KB per file on average. In other words worst case for a spinner, but nearly best case for an SSD. Or would show the most dramatic difference in speed anyway. If that was just a few large file I'm sure the hard drive would be quite a bit faster.

Exactly. Sustained transfer rate means little except maybe for video people. For everyone else, the real world isn't a single 8 GB file, it's 20 years of work stockpiling thousands of Word docs, .jpgs, .pdfs, .ppts, email files, thousands of CAD files, source code trees with thousands of text files, etc.

You can't even download and install a printer driver these days that isn't a 350 MB software package that has to write 500 files while installing.

Computers don't stutter and show hourglasses transcoding an 8 GB linear file at the maximum sustained speed of the media, they do it when going to the control panel, updating drivers, installing software, launching software, trying to shut down, etc, what real world users experience every day. Try launching IE while you are in the middle of said transcoding and see how long it takes to launch and how your 8 CPU cores are idle because of disk IO.

I have no love for anything with read/write heads.
 
Last edited:

SuperSix

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,872
2
0
Meanwhile, the numbers are starting to trickle in:
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/attaching_numbers_hard_drive_shortage

The source says "Seagate forecasts global supply of 110-120 million HDDs in the fourth quarter, 33.3-38.9% short of global demand at 180 million units."

Ouch!


Love the bullshit commenters. I can't be assed to comment there.

Yes - it's a massive fucking conspiracy between ALL of the HDD manufactures, ALL distributors, and ALL of the etail stores.
 

fastamdman

Golden Member
Nov 18, 2011
1,335
70
91
so can't really feel sympathy for people whining about a 1 TB HDD costing them a whopping $70 and possibly rising to a staggering $80...

The prices went up by a TON on some stuff. Drives that were going for 70 before are more then 150 now.
 

kami

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
17,627
5
81
NCIX is limiting people to 1 drive per person. You'd think that would be enough to help the situation, but nope they are charging 400 dollars for a 2tb WD Black. Earlier this year I got one for $129. Absurd... especially with there being plenty in stock. Glad I don't need any storage space right now...
 

BFG10K

Lifer
Aug 14, 2000
22,709
2,995
126
We seem to have some opposing views here.

First, Seagate says the shortage might persist throughout all of 2012: http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/storag...ard_Drive_Supply_to_Persist_Through_2012.html

But this article says demand hasn’t been as high as expected, there’s overstocking, and prices might start dropping in December this year: http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20111116PD212.html

I’m personally waiting for WD to release 1 TB per platter drives at 7200rpm. I’ll hold onto my Caviar black until then. I have absolutely zero interest in SSDs, not even for a boot drive. Even with currently inflated HD prices, SSD are still horrifically overpriced in comparison.