Tom's Guide > Forum > Storage > Hard Disks > why dualCore procs and not DualHead HDDs?

why dualCore procs and not DualHead HDDs?

Forum Storage : Hard Disks - why dualCore procs and not DualHead HDDs?

TomsGuide.com: Over 800,000 questions and answers to address all your high-tech questions. Sign up now! Its free!
Ask the community Add a reply
Word :    Username :           
 
shpe11   11-10-2008 at 11:57:40 PM

has nobody think of this ideea?
dualHead HDDs?


check my ideea (photo and details): http://concepts.shpe.ro/HDD.php

Add a reply
Sponsored Links
Register or log in to remove.
Nik_I   11-11-2008 at 12:06:35 AM
- 0 +

my guess as to why that hasn't been done is because that would use up more power and would require a larger enclosure to fit in a second drive motor. also, the heads might interfere with eachother.

Message quoted 1 times
Reply to Nik_I
shpe11   11-11-2008 at 12:11:41 AM
- 0 +

Nik_I wrote :

my guess as to why that hasn't been done is because that would use up more power and would require a larger enclosure to fit in a second drive motor. also, the heads might interfere with eachother.



hey there is no secod motor, just only for the head... the interference I don't know... but I say there will be some balance, don't know if the spin is 0.000000001% afected in time because the head..., whatever I wrote to WD but no answer :( so I make public the ideea..

but overall I rather have a 1TB drive like this than 2x500Gb in RAID mode...

Reply to shpe11
thogrom   11-11-2008 at 12:21:56 AM
- 0 +

For one the heads would get all messed up unless you divide the drive into sections and each head has a certain partition... THEN you negate the ability to do twice the work... unless you do an internal striped raid array thing...

 

it has been done... but it is so impractical...

 

Also SSDs are starting to take off... I got one of the "new" sh*tty ones and its still better than a conventional drive

 

as soon as SSDs come in at around 2$ a GB and the write performance... (not fake benchmark performance) is at or exceeds the write performance of standard drives... the standard drive will fall off the face of the earth in a matter of years

Message quoted 1 times
Message edited by thogrom on 11-11-2008 at 12:22:30 AM
Reply to thogrom
shpe11   11-11-2008 at 12:39:39 AM
- 0 +

thogrom wrote :

For one the heads would get all messed up unless you divide the drive into sections and each head has a certain partition... THEN you negate the ability to do twice the work... unless you do an internal striped raid array thing...

it has been done... but it is so impractical...

Also SSDs are starting to take off... I got one of the "new" sh*tty ones and its still better than a conventional drive

as soon as SSDs come in at around 2$ a GB and the write performance... (not fake benchmark performance) is at or exceeds the write performance of standard drives... the standard drive will fall off the face of the earth in a matter of years



i said, some kind of RAID, and ofcourse two sections... read details from the link... yeah ssd, but only want to make the battle more interesting... andcan be a design with 4 heads too... ssd is cool, and I guesx more relyable than a piece of disk of metal...

Reply to shpe11
thogrom   11-11-2008 at 12:58:28 AM
- 0 +

so then your next theory would be to have... say scalable heads... and then basically infinite right?

thats basically what an SSD is... hugely simplified but thats basically the gist of it...

SSD is the future... the velociraptor from WD is the last real noteworthy (IMO of course) standard HDD

Reply to thogrom
kamel5547   11-11-2008 at 02:40:10 AM
- 0 +

http://www.storagereview.com/guide [...] tiple.html

For a bit of detail why not. The real question is how much would you be willing to pay for one, the idea that you do not need to duplicate everything is incorrect, so the price would be much higher, at which point it is more cost effective to buy a 15K drive, or RAID 0 two drives together.

Reply to kamel5547
mrmez   11-11-2008 at 02:55:52 AM
- 0 +

Technically its not going to be THAT hard.
It all comes down to consumer demand, and how bothered someone can be to develop that specific idea.

Obviously the interest on both sides is pretty low, and its likely we will never see it.

Alternatives are also plentiful, so people arent starved for choice. There are RAID arrays of various types, and with large magnetic discs being so cheap its an ideal solution. Then there are a few different types of 10,000 - 15,000rpm drives also. 20,000rpm drives are also being researched, but id say it will lose out to SSD's, which are becoming faster and cheaper every month.

By 2010, which isnt that far away, id imagine many entry-level PC's and laptops will come standard, or with the option of an SSD.

------------------------------ Q6600 B3 3.0Ghz @ 1.125v
4850
P5B-D
8Gb 800mhz
Reply to mrmez
shpe11   11-13-2008 at 08:35:30 PM
- 0 +

yeah, I know the option is SSD...

i'm still dreaming of a biological drive... and if I want to add a TB I should feed it with an apple or banana :)

Reply to shpe11
Ask the community Add a reply
Tom's Guide > Forum > Storage > Hard Disks > why dualCore procs and not DualHead HDDs?
Go to:

There are 13 identified and unidentified users. To see the list of identified users, Click here.

Forum map
Bestofmedia Forum ©
2000-2009 Bestofmedia Group
Page generated in 0.266 seconds
Please mind

You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months.
If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.

Add a reply Cancel
Google ads