Hitachi Releases World's Most Energy-Efficient HDD 118
An anonymous reader writes "Today Hitachi released what they are calling the 'world's most energy efficient desktop hard drive' capable of reducing the active and idle power consumption by up to 40 percent over the previous generation." The drive will come in a range of flavors starting at 250GB and ranging to 500GB. Hitachi is promising these drives in high volume later this year.
Okay, Less Power (Score:5, Interesting)
your wallet (Score:5, Insightful)
Flamebait?! (Score:2, Insightful)
Three obvious things (Score:2, Interesting)
B) Latency. Nowhere did they mention the "wake-up" time from the Low RPM mode, but you can guarantee it's horrendous. "Average Latency" as the specs say, only tell you what happened during test conditions, conditions very unlikely to put it into Low RPM mode.
C) Density. Cutting edge drives are more dense.
If I were Google, these might sound like attractive trade offs.
Re:Three obvious things (Score:4, Interesting)
All servers in data centers are running 15000rpm these days. Mostly SCSI until recently, in my experience.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Which ones are then? I have actually had very good results with my old 7500 series 3ware (PATA, not SATA) cards although I would purchase differently today or maybe go with Linux or BSD based NAS.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Now if only they'd all worked together and stuck with one serial standard instead of two very slightly different ones so we wouldn't have cheap SATA (that won't work with the good drives) and expensive SATA+SAS controllers...
I want a couple of SAS (well, faster 10k) drives for my OS and SATA (well, slower, high capacity)drives for my bulk data, using one of the cheapish controllers...
The whole distinction between SATA and SAS is silly anyway, since the interface makes little difference. We h
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Luggable computers (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> "These drives were basically designed for datacenters, so you can look at paying out the teeth for them."
If its being used in a data center, what is the likelyhood that it will be able to "low-idle" for any length of time?
More likely these are for getting the "Energy Saver" sticker on desktop computers that have higher-consumption video, cpu, etc. Of course, just turning off the computer before going home will save more energy than leaving everything on during "down time", but too many people like
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
What percentage of Google's data do you think is actually being accessed at any given time? I'll bet most of the queries are for a small percentage of the data, plus most accesses are to the indexes and not to the actual data caches.
People don't even read the SUMMARIES any more ... (Score:4, Informative)
Lets go back to what I originally stated - that these drives are probably NOT for data centers.
From the summary of TFA:
> "Today Hitachi released what they are calling the 'world's most energy efficient desktop hard drive'
These are probably NEVER going to go into data centers, at least not under any sort of warranty.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
"Nice domain. :-)"
The previous owner let it lapse, and it was available for 11 months before I checked and went WTF!?!
Back on-topic - I'm surprised some typo squater didn't grab it so for its similarity to trolltech.com.
Paying out the teeth? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Okay, less power. But what have you given up in the trade-off?
You buy Deathstar (now Hitachi Global Storage Satan Dataeater DeathStar [wikipedia.org]). It works really well for about a year, to trick you into storing vital data on it and then goes from making funny noises to total failure in a matter of hours.
Actually when Deathstars decide to destroy your data they actually do a much more thorough job than DOD 5220.22-M [microsoft.com]:
http://www.astro.ufl.edu/~ken/crash/index.html [ufl.edu]
Note that the drive has scraped all the magnetic oxide off the glass platter and deposited it the bottom of the drive.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Comparing (Score:1)
Power consumption of a hard drive == ??? (Score:1)
This post not meant to be insightful or funny, I really want to know.
Re:Power consumption of a hard drive == ??? (Score:4, Informative)
http://news.digitaltrends.com/news/story/12556/samsung_announces_64_gb_solid_state_drive [digitaltrends.com]
"...consumes just half a Watt when operating (one tenth of a Watt when idle)"
vs. from the article:
"Through a 40-percent power reduction, Hitachi GST has delivered unmatched idle power utilization of 3.6 watts on the 250GB capacity model and 4.8 watts on models with capacities of 320GB or greater. Similarly, the P7K500 has reduced its active power requirements to 6.4 watts and 8.2 watts for its one- and two-disk models, respectively. By utilizing roughly half the 7 watts of idle power typically allocated for hard drives..."
Re: (Score:2)
They do better, but not by a lot.
Chips consume a lot of power.
It's really pretty easy to cut power consumption if you're willing to drastically cut performance as well.
Re: (Score:2)
It's really pretty easy to cut power consumption if you're willing to drastically cut performance as well.
If you look at performance per watt, the SSD looks pretty good.
The SSD article noted above claims, "the 64 GB unit can read 64 MB/S, write 45 MB/s"
while the traditional harddrive noted in the post claims, "1138 Mb/s max. media data rate" or 142 MB/s. By the way, I highly doubt it can sustain that but lets just say it can.
If we compare reads vs. reads, we get 64 MB/s in 0.5 watts vs. 142 MB/s in 6.4 watts or:
SSD=128MB/s/watt vs. traditional harddrive=22MB/s/watt
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
okay. (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
> "but can they get rid of that horrible grinding noise?"
But it's got to make that noice.... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You can buy a lot of quiet computing hardware, including hard drives [endpcnoise.com]. It can get pricey if you get really fanatical about it, but I wouldn't buy another PC again that wasn't designed to be quiet. A quiet office is just too nice.
Re: (Score:1)
This might be interesting for large arrays... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
> "My laptop uses on 20 watts while operating, so cutting out 6 watts would be quite beneficial."
I know its not usual to read the articles, but could you (and everyone else) at least read the summary?
The summary makes it clear these are for desktops, not laptops, data centers, or anything else.
FTFS: "Today Hitachi released what they are calling the 'world's most energy efficient desktop hard drive"
Re: (Score:2)
And to clarify (since the Original Article's title is wrong): these are announced as the most efficient desktop hard drives, because laptop hard drives are already much more efficient than desktop hard drives. In fact, if you want to build an energy efficient desktop, a good way is to use a laptop hard drive with an adapter.
Re: (Score:2)
In fact, if you want to build an energy efficient desktop, a good way is to use a laptop hard drive with an adapter.
Actually thanks to SATA the adaptor is no longer needed. They have the same plug now.
Re: (Score:2)
need some kind of mounting bracket to keep the drive physically in place,
unless you have a case designed for the smaller laptop drives.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You do indeed need a mounting bracket and at least with the suppliers I use getting said mounting bracket requires buying a laptop IDE to desktop IDE adaptor as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Your laptop hard drive is far more efficient than desktop hard drives. There probably isn't even 6 watts to be cut from your notebook's hard drive power consumption to begin with.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Portable drives powered via the USB connection can take more power than USB permits. Get the drive well under that level and you wan't need to use those double-USB cables.
Re: (Score:2)
Those >600W PSUs are just for people who need to psychologically compensate for something.
but will it run Linux? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
"The 7200rpm SATA hard drive"
That pretty much means that any computer with a SATA port can use it, and SATA pretty much means that any modern OS can run on it/make use of it.
The question is questionably classic, but it definitely isn't classic when it is asked stupidly.
Oh Really? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Are you sure the question was asked stupidly? Or was it perhaps answered rudely (and maybe incorrectly)?
I don't see how the answer was rude, given that I didn't SUPPLY an answer. It just seemed a good opportunity to bust out one of my favorite quotes. A hard drive that actually "runs Linux" would be awesome, though.
Back to the point, if it doesn't work in Linux, it soon will. That's just the way of it.
That's nothing (Score:4, Funny)
How's that for energy efficient?
Re: (Score:2)
Later this year? (Score:1)
Would it make a difference in desktop machines? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Would it make a difference in desktop machines? (Score:4, Informative)
Goodness, no. The current the power supply draws from the wall varies with the amount of power it's being asked to supply. You can easily verify this yourself by noticing how much hotter your laptop gets when you're making it do a lot of work. The heat it puts out is the final form of the energy the power supply draws from the wall (or the battery).
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm genuinely curious. What *is* it that drives the demand for power supplies that can source that much power? I run a home file server (a crappy Pentium II -- 266 MHz, yay) with 7 hard drives stuck in it off a rather wimpy power supply -- almost certainly no more than 350 W -- probably closer to 250 W. (Not sure what it is, and I can't be arsed to go check.)
Re: (Score:1)
And to answer the grandparent, a higher capacity power supply could use more power if the efficiency at low loads is worse than the lower capacity power supply (and it usually is). A typical modern desktop system at idle will only use around 75W of power. Let's say the 400W is 75% efficient at 75W load and the 1000W is 70% at the same load. The 400W will pull 10
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Most PSUs have a "sweet spot" for efficiency somewhere in the middle of their output range, so - all else being equal - small PSUs will be more efficient with light loads but large PSUs will be more efficient for heavy loads.
For example: A Core 2 Duo system with 2 GB of ram and a high-end vide
Silent (Score:3, Informative)
This range of drives:
2.6/2.8 dB typical idle acoustics
WD Scorpio (pretty silent 2,5 " HDD @ 5400 rpm):
2.0 typical idle acoustics
Re: (Score:2)
Greenness (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The price is what makes or breaks how good this will be, but we are certainly looking forward to testing these.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=335643&cid=21075965 [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I can't play computer games in the summer because my "Wintendo" generates too much heat for my AC unit. This isn't much of a problem for me, I'm not much of a gamer, but anything that can reduce AC power per unit of computer power is all to the good.
WD's got one too. (Score:2, Informative)
WD's got one in their series named for german scheisse-pr0n: Caviar GP [techreport.com]. 4W idle, capacities up to 1TB.
SSD? (Score:2)
(yes I know you can't get SSD's of this size yet, but size isn't the focal point here)
Re: (Score:2)
Something tells me perhaps the best of both worlds would be a drive that (I think IBM) was working on that had a large array of small read/write heads, and read data by shifting the platter on a x-y plane, where the whole array of heads could pick up bits at the same time as opposed to the 4-8 of a normal spinning HDD.
Re: (Score:2)
I always wondered why they don't do that for optical drives. That could certainly improve performance. Even with two read heads you could stamp your CD-ROM reader with 104 X max. :-)
The reason
Re: (Score:2)
This is just OK (Score:2)
I think that while a power-cutting hard drive for desktops, workstations, and servers is a great idea, I think that would be much more critical for a laptop, since power is its biggest limiting factor (i.e. the obvious). Why don't companies focus on maximizing flash storage for higher performance in these settings? That way, servers can not only get completely awesome read speeds, but hopefully boosted write speeds at rates comparable to platter-based hard drives. Or, at least until that idea substantiates,
High volume (Score:5, Funny)
As usual... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Ok (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
http://techreport.com/discussions.x/13434 [techreport.com]
Hot Drives (Score:2)
Cause that drives me nuts.
You think so, huh (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
1) just about to die
2) already dead
I suggest setting up a RAID-1 on two hard drives. Software RAID is very easy to do on Linux (instructions for Slackware [userlocal.com]; most other distros have a point-and-click GUI that will set it up for you). For Mac OS X, I think you just have to run Disk Utility while booted from the DVD, create the RAID, then quit and proceed with the installer. I'm not sure if you can set up a software RAID in Windows Vista or not,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)