Samsung launches 1TB MT2 2.5-inch HDD

vbimport

#1

Samsung launches 1TB MT2 2.5-inch HDD.

[newsimage]http://static.rankone.nl/images_posts/2010/07/8V8Khx.jpg[/newsimage]Samsung announced it is now shipping the 1TB Spinpoint MT2 internal hard drive that can be used in consumer electronics, such as DVRs, digital TVs, and other devices that support 2.5-inch drives.


Read the full article here: [http://www.myce.com/news/samsung-launches-1tb-mt2-2-5-inch-hdd-32207/](http://www.myce.com/news/samsung-launches-1tb-mt2-2-5-inch-hdd-32207/)


Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

#2

Presumably this will fit in a NC10 Notebook. Wow!


#3

I like that new drive, this could be the next update for my toshiba laptop.


#4

Who seriously needs 1TB in a laptop? … assuming it fits into it …
Better off with a seagate hybrid drive … :wink:

It’s great & all for PVR’s & etc.

Hurray and whatnot.


#5

I like the new drive size, SATA 3.0Gbps interface? why not go SATA 6.0 it is time for faster HDD drive`s.


#6

[QUOTE=Chriscreative;2534251]I like the new drive size, SATA 3.0Gbps interface? why not go SATA 6.0 it is time for faster HDD drive`s.[/QUOTE]
Because …

  1. 10K RPM HDD’s barely reach SATA-150 speeds with sustained throughput.

  2. Access times for high performance HDD’s benefit slightly from SATA-300, due to reduced latencies, and speedups from cache-ram.

  3. Sata-600 is just absolute overkill on a High performance 3.5" 10K RPM HDD.

  4. [U][I]This is not a high performance desktop/server 3.5" HDD - it’s a nettop/notebook 2.5" HDD.[/I][/U]


#7

I agree but all HDD, Motherboards, Desktops Laptops etc. should chance over to SATA 6.0 and USB 3 faster is always better. For backups and SSD for the operating system.


#8

[QUOTE=Chriscreative;2534306]I agree but all HDD, Motherboards, Desktops Laptops etc. should chance over to SATA 6.0 and USB 3 faster is always better. For backups and SSD for the operating system.[/QUOTE]
New stuff costs $$. Add on chips cost $$$. Most people would never notice the difference of Sata600 vs SATA300 over the next few years. It just costs more. Similarly with USB3.

When it’s fully supported by the chipsets in a decent quantity of ports, motherboards will include it as standard. In the meantime, motherboards will come with USB2/ Sata300, with a premium for mobo’s with USB3/SATA600 ports tacked on as an afterthought.


#9

[QUOTE=debro;2534559]Similarly with USB3.[/QUOTE] Not true. USB 2.0 is already limiting the speed (and power requirements) of current external harddrives and flashdrives, so USB 3.0 is sorely needed.


#10

[QUOTE=debro;2534559]It just costs more. Similarly with USB3…[/QUOTE]
:iagree:


#11

Why have a quad core CPU high-end graphics cards etc, if other devices creates a bottle neck.???


#12

[QUOTE=Chriscreative;2535033]Why have a quad core CPU high-end graphics cards etc, if other devices creates a bottle neck.???[/QUOTE]

In a laptop? You honestly believe that those tiny little 2.5" platters rotating at 5400rpm with an 8MB cache are going to outperform a 3.5" HDD at 10K rpm with 32MB cache … Because I can’t help but notice that you either don’t understand, or haven’t bothered reading, my previous post. 3.5" HDD at 10K RPM will rarely stress Sata1.5Gb/s at full speed with sustained reads (large files). Improvements in BUFFERED speeds show improvements on sata3.0Gb/s, most HDD caches can’t provide enough bandwidth to transfer their entire contents at full speed on Sata6.0Gb/s Sata6.0Gb/s is overkill for desktop HDD’s (SSD’s are different). Suggesting that Sata6.0 is required on a 2.5" 5400RPM hdd is absolutely absurd. Your suggestion that the Sata6.0Gb/s interface will somehow speedup these slow 2.5" 5400rpm HDD’s is comparative to suggsting that gold coating a turd, will provide equivalent value of a solid gold bar the same size. I cannot stress this enough …


#13

[QUOTE=debro;2535037]In a laptop? You honestly believe that those tiny little 2.5" platters rotating at 5400rpm with an 8MB cache are going to outperform a 3.5" HDD at 10K rpm with 32MB cache …[/QUOTE]

No a 2.5" hdd at 5400 cant replace a desktop drive, but what if you need the extra storage room, and speed is not that important? A bigger HDD should be able to do the job nicely.

[QUOTE=debro;2535037] Because I can’t help but notice that you either don’t understand, or haven’t bothered reading, my previous post. 3.5" HDD at 10K RPM will rarely stress Sata1.5Gb/s at full speed with sustained reads (large files). Improvements in BUFFERED speeds show improvements on sata3.0Gb/s, most HDD caches can’t provide enough bandwidth to transfer their entire contents at full speed on Sata6.0Gb/s Sata6.0Gb/s is overkill for desktop HDD’s (SSD’s are different). Suggesting that Sata6.0 is required on a 2.5" 5400RPM hdd is absolutely absurd. Your suggestion that the Sata6.0Gb/s interface will somehow speedup these slow 2.5" 5400rpm HDD’s is comparative to suggsting that gold coating a turd, will provide equivalent value of a solid gold bar the same size. I cannot stress this enough …[/QUOTE]

I agree that most drive hardly use all the sata1 bandwidth (unless they are in raid), but my main concern is the [B]Access time[/B], and the only hard drive that can make it disappears is an SSD.
Sata3 will be great with SSD drives, all the rest conventional hard drives will simply do the same job as they do now with sata2.


#14

[QUOTE=vroom;2535049]No a 2.5" hdd at 5400 cant replace a desktop drive, but what if you need the extra storage room, and speed is not that important? A bigger HDD should be able to do the job nicely.[/QUOTE]
I’d still recommend a seagate Hybrid drive (500GB HDD + 4GB SSD).
If you really need 1TB of HDD space … a separate external drive with USB3 & Esata(3Gb/s) would fit the job.
But I’d find it hard to believe that any user honestly needs more than 500GB storage installed in a laptop. :wink:

I know … 640k is enough for anybody :wink:

This drive is squarely aimed at PVR’s and portable storage. Samsung know their target audience :iagree:
High performance drives are not required in these devices, although the minimal access times of SSD’s would be a great thing - but capacity is definately the more important factor.