Not much seems to be happening in the mechanical hard drive market lately, but that might only be the calm before the storm. The Register claims to have it on good authority that Seagate will introduce a 3.5" drive with a whopping 3TB capacity later this year.
This product will reportedly be part of the enterprise-oriented 3.5" Constellation ES series, and it should therefore have a 7,200-RPM spindle speed and a 6Gbps Serial Attached SCSI interface. Since Seagate sells existing 500GB, 1TB, and 2TB Constellation ES hard drives with 3Gbps SATA interfaces, perhaps the 3TB behemoth will come in a SATA flavor, too.
Seagate also has a 2.5" Constellation drive with a 1TB capacity in the works, according to The Register, which expects a launch "around the mid-year point." If the existing mobile Constellation offerings are any indication, Seagate may offer a similar choice of interfaces, a 7,200-RPM spindle speed, and optional full-disk encryption. The Register doesn't divulge any such specifics, though.
1TB in a 2.5" form factor wouldn't be quite as impressive as a 3TB 3.5" hard drive, of course. Western Digital already has a 1TB, 5,200-RPM mobile product on the market, and Toshiba announced 750GB and 1TB mobile offerings with 5,400-RPM spindle speeds back in March. Seagate might only break new ground if it provides that same capacity at 7,200 RPM, with a standard 9.5-mm form factor, or both.
|1. Hdfisise - $600||2. Ryszard - $503||3. Andrew Lauritzen - $502|
|4. the - $306||5. SomeOtherGeek - $300||6. Ryu Connor - $250|
|7. doubtful500 - $200||8. Anonymous Gerbil - $150||9. webkido13 - $135|
|10. cygnus1 - $126|
|AMD issues updated statement on Fury X noise problems||31|
|AMD revises Q2 guidance; gross margin, revenue fall||38|
|TSMC's 10-nm FinFET process toddles towards validation||17|
|Samsung cranks SSDs to 2TB with the 850 Pro and EVO||56|
|TR's July 2015 mobile staff picks||27|
|Minecraft: Story Mode gets a trailer, more details at Minecon||11|
|Microsoft plans phased rollout for Windows 10 upgraders||32|
|Scott, you should've coined a name for this benchmark style. Maybe "Frame Damage Per Second," "Scott-free percentile," or "Wasson the screen." But now...||+76|