• mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    2 days ago

    Yeah I can’t wait for these to drop as $2000 SAS HDDs that are somehow more expensive than NVME SSDs of the same capacity.

    • supamanc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      AI hasn’t found a way to make storage ridiculously expensive yet, so this could tie in neatly!

      • Reygle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 day ago

        But friend, it has? SSDs have (on average) tripled in price in the last 3 months. SSDs are genuinely the only storage that matters outside of a server rack.

          • CorrectAlias@piefed.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 day ago

            HDD prices have also skyrocketed. Even the refurbished/recertified market. For example, I could previously get a manufactured recertified 22TB (HC570, I think) drive for around $299 around two months ago. Now, that same drive is at $409. That’s over $100 in around that timeframe, and is also for recertified drives.

  • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    2 days ago

    Dual-actuator heads always scare me. Hard disks are already insane precision mechanical instruments.

    • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 days ago

      It looks like the pivots are on opposite sides of the disk platters, which means that if one fails you essentially lose access to the data on that side.

      That’s not really appreciably different from the same failure happening in a single-pivot drive, though it is more mechanical complexity packed into the same amount of space.

      I’m not sure what the failure rates on HDD pivots are like. In my own experience the control board or motor is more likely to fail.

      • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        2 days ago

        More like the complexity and precision needed to make it work, at mass produced volumes. But I guess you could translate that to feat of unreliability.

        • Glitchvid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 day ago

          Undoubtedly going to have a higher failure rate, however in my experience WD’s enterprise drives are extremely high reliability regardless.

          Once these hit the surplus market in ~5 years they’ll be neat (if we get them in SATA) for ZFS RAID arrays; faster rebuild speeds will be nice.

          • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            I already pre-bought drives for the replacement / expansion of my ZFS pool as the current drives fail so I’m locked into old technology for likely many years. 😔