[HN Gopher] HDD Sales Crater, Drop 35% Year-over-Year
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       HDD Sales Crater, Drop 35% Year-over-Year
        
       Author : ms512
       Score  : 60 points
       Date   : 2023-04-15 20:23 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.tomshardware.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.tomshardware.com)
        
       | superkuh wrote:
       | It's crazy to me how many people will buy a computer with 250 GB
       | of total storage and then end up with a series of rube-goldberg'd
       | in slow/fragile external hard drives just to get close to the
       | performance of a "normal" computer.
       | 
       | SSD only pre-built commercial computer offerings have set back
       | the average computer's ability to do useful work by 15 years. SSD
       | are just too expensive for most people to use for useful amounts
       | of storage (say, family photos+system backups). And even if it's
       | a pre-built desktop the emergence of SSDs has made it somehow
       | acceptable to sell a 1TB HDD in a modern computer. It's scammy.
        
         | sbierwagen wrote:
         | Your information is out of date. Here is a 2 TB NVMe drive for
         | US$69: https://www.microcenter.com/product/651303/inland-
         | qn322-2tb-...
        
         | kitsunesoba wrote:
         | I wouldn't say things were all that much better before, with
         | low end machines shipping with 5400RPM (or even 4200RPM) laptop
         | drives. Those things were so slow that even if their capacities
         | were far more voluminous than the SSDs that ship in modern low
         | end machines, their usefulness was questionable because e.g.
         | sifting through a massive photo collection was miserable even
         | then and would've only gotten worse as average photo filesizes
         | increased.
         | 
         | Base configs should absolutely come at least double the SSD
         | capacity they currently do, though, in everything but maybe
         | bargain bin Chromebooks.
        
         | rektide wrote:
         | Phones being 64 or 128GB and no SD card is same level
         | absurdity. What a shitty act. Given how cheap SD cards are it's
         | just such a misservice.
         | 
         | It's indeed getting harder because some phones are literally
         | now eSIM only. Before, there was near no excuse. My last
         | phone's sim caddy had a SSD caddy on the other side, which just
         | takes up so little extra volume & requires so little extra
         | design/features.
        
         | wtallis wrote:
         | WTF are you going on about? Adding external drives has nothing
         | to do with "performance of a 'normal' computer".
         | 
         | Many people genuinely don't need more than 250GB in their
         | computer; many more will never need more than 1TB. If you're
         | having trouble believing that such users exist, you need a
         | serious reality check about how normal people use their
         | computers. Most people who buy a pre-built computer with 1TB or
         | less of storage are not being meaningfully constrained in their
         | ability to do useful work with that computer.
         | 
         | And regardless of how much storage is in your computer, you
         | need storage that's _not_ in the computer to hold backups. Are
         | you basing your expectations for how much storage a computer
         | should come equipped with on the needs for primary storage
         | _and_ backup /archival storage done in defiance of all common
         | sense and recommendations about where and how to store backups?
        
         | moffkalast wrote:
         | It absolutely amazes me how many people spent good money on a
         | 128 GB NVMe boot drive that speeds up their initial OS loading
         | a tiny bit... which represents probably a fraction of a percent
         | of the total time spent waiting for disk operations in total,
         | and then spend the entire time working from a slow HDD instead.
         | Like congrats for spending all your budget on your garage door
         | instead of your car.
        
           | agumonkey wrote:
           | doesn't surprise me much, boot/resume are part of context
           | switching and it's psychologically very important; you often
           | want the cost of getting in and out as cheap as possible
        
           | xigency wrote:
           | I don't know about you but when I switched over from HDD to
           | SSD years back I did some crude measurements and found the
           | time it took to boot into a usable environment went from >=
           | 90 seconds to < 25 seconds.
           | 
           | And it's not just booting the system that was noticeable.
           | Everything became more responsive. It was like night and day.
           | 
           | I have no problem separating my OS drive from my
           | games/photos/backups. It's actually what I prefer to do. And
           | I like to see that the operating system isn't so bloated it
           | can't fit in 100 GB.
        
             | TylerE wrote:
             | That's not what he's saying. He's saying that the
             | difference between a bog standard SSD (like just a decent
             | USB3 external or whatever vs NVME) is really not that
             | noticeable.
        
               | wtallis wrote:
               | NVMe has been the predominant standard for SSDs for
               | several years now. Even USB "portable SSDs" are almost
               | exclusively using NVMe drives internally now rather than
               | being built around SATA SSDs or SSD controllers that
               | natively speak USB (which is the low-end solution used
               | for thumb drives).
        
       | z3t4 wrote:
       | HDDs are cheap and last a long time. Perfect for redundant
       | configurations.
        
       | BooneJS wrote:
       | I have 4 HDDs in NAS and one 12 TB drive for Time Machine. It's
       | great to have 4 TB in your MacBook, but it's so expensive and I
       | personally don't need to actively have more than 1 TB at any one
       | time (and maybe not even half that), meaning the rest can be
       | offloaded to a NAS.
        
       | ilamont wrote:
       | Can anyone give some insights into what trends are driving this
       | beyond a global drop in PC shipments? For instance, longer-
       | lasting hardware, shift to cloud storage, decline in crypto
       | mining (see reqs https://bitcoin.org/en/bitcoin-
       | core/features/requirements), other factors?
        
         | loeg wrote:
         | Cost cutting measures by hyperscalers in response to non-zero
         | interest rates.
        
           | ms512 wrote:
           | Essentially this; drive manufacturers' financial reports are
           | a good source of data here.
           | 
           | For example, WD's Q2 financial report [1] shows:
           | 
           | Q1 2023 Cloud Revenue: $1,829M
           | 
           | Q2 2023 Cloud Revenue: $1,224M (down 33%)
           | 
           | Q1 2023 Customer Revenue: $679M
           | 
           | Q2 2023 Customer Revenue: $794M (up 17%)
           | 
           | [1] https://investor.wdc.com/static-
           | files/5c73f7fb-869a-4850-bd2...
        
         | ThrowawayTestr wrote:
         | 0.5-1TB SSDs are cheap now. The only HDDs being bought are
         | really big drives.
        
           | TylerE wrote:
           | 2TB drives are often cheaper (per TB) than 1TB drives these
           | days.
        
         | wolongong942 wrote:
         | In my case i just buy used HDDs from the local PC repair shop
         | for pennies, and use them for my long term storage and offsite
         | backups. Shops usually swap people's HDDs out for SSDs to speed
         | up their PC, so they have a ton of ~1tb ones to sell for cheap.
         | I doubt people like myself are impacting the market for HDDs
         | though.
        
       | MrFoof wrote:
       | HDD still has a point, but as SSD prices diminish, we'll continue
       | to see it drop off.
       | 
       | One of the main reasons is density. You can put 32 E1.S EDSFF
       | SSDs in a single rack unit fairly commonly nowadays. It wouldn't
       | surprise me if some 1U chassis did 40.
       | 
       | There's also reliability. They're not infallible, but it's
       | looking like AFRs for SSDs might be half that of HDDs. That's a
       | _big_ deal.
       | 
       | Of course there's also cost. Prosumer SSDs are about $70-75/TB
       | now, and common PCIe 4.0 U.2/U.3 enterprise and datacenter SSDs
       | are in the $90/TB range. PCIe 5.0 enterprise and datacenter SSDs?
       | "Yikes", is what I'll say. Have fun negotiating with your rep on
       | those. ;) Meanwhile, 7200rpm SATA HDDs can be had for $15/TB.
       | These are retail end-user prices. If you're doing huge volumes as
       | a cloud provider or a huge SAAS business, pricing goes quite a
       | bit lower.
       | 
       | -- -----
       | 
       | Where do HDDs still make sense? Sustained transfer operations,
       | nearline storage, and as part of a storage tier where you can
       | intelligently hide the HDDs behind SSDs _(lots of solutions for
       | this)_ and get SSD performance most of the time, and guarantee it
       | where it matters. There 's many use cases where they just
       | dominate because of their low cost, and the ability to get the
       | performance required for a lot cheaper.
       | 
       | Though compared to high-end enterprise SSDs, 7200rpm SATA HDDs
       | are actually still fine for power, typically pulling 6-7W per HDD
       | instead of 11-15W for fairly common enterprise SSDs. Some
       | enterprise SSDs _(mostly PCIe 5, mostly E3-based form factors)_
       | can pull 25W, if not 40W. Remember, enterprise SSDs don 't do
       | things like SLC cache much -- they just have a MOUNTAIN of NAND
       | _(plus PLP capacitors)_ you can read /write from in massive
       | parallelization. There's no ingest drop-off as a result, but you
       | do have to power all that NAND.
        
         | Eisenstein wrote:
         | > Where do HDDs still make sense?
         | 
         | You forgot 'cold storage'. The data on SSDs will degrade if
         | they are not powered on.
        
           | MrFoof wrote:
           | Yep, though it depends on the use case. If you want truly
           | cold storage that's super rarely accessed, LTO tape is really
           | hard to beat on $/TB!
        
             | Eisenstein wrote:
             | If the TB is less than ~20, then the equation breaks since
             | you have buy the unit in addition to the tape. So, yeah, it
             | depends on use but I would argue on the consumer level most
             | people aren't storing that much data. But I could be wrong.
        
               | steveh777 wrote:
               | I think it's a lot more than 20TB - contemporary LTO
               | drives are on the order of $10k!
        
       | nubinetwork wrote:
       | So I just bought a 256gb nvme drive for a build, but I've been
       | waiting for large capacity ssds for years...
       | 
       | It seems the ssd market isn't interested in making large drives
       | unless they are dram-less (anything cheap) or have very limited
       | write cycles (eg samsung qvo).
        
         | wtallis wrote:
         | It's more accurate to say that the SSD vendors aren't
         | interested in trying to market consumer drives that cost
         | upwards of $1500, because there really isn't a market for such
         | drives. Plenty of enthusiasts will say they would like an 8+ TB
         | high-end drive, but few people are willing to spend more on
         | their SSD than on their GPU.
        
       | rektide wrote:
       | I hope the HDD market can survive. I really really appreciate
       | being able to buy a 20TB Exos for $400. SSDs are so absurdly
       | great, but I really like being able to have a nice data-archive.
       | When Covid hit and the whole PC parts market dried up, and the
       | Chia chain thing was happening, there were days where I was
       | thinking I'll never be able to have affordable bulk storage
       | again.
        
       | KronisLV wrote:
       | Out of curiosity, I had a look at the current SSD and HDD prices
       | available in a local e-commerce site:                 Capacity
       | HDD      SSD       500 GB    47 EUR   36 EUR       1 TB      41
       | EUR   49 EUR       2 TB      54 EUR   89 EUR       4 TB      77
       | EUR   264 EUR       8 TB      161 EUR  531 EUR       16 TB
       | 313 EUR  none
       | 
       | So it seems like HDDs are still more cost effective for storing
       | larger amounts of data, as long as your workloads permit that,
       | but for smaller capacities SSDs now reign supreme, cost wise.
       | There's also the fact that most of these HDDs that I looked at
       | were 3.5" but SSDs were either 2.5" or of the M.2 variety, which
       | may or may not matter, depending on what you want to put them in.
       | 
       | I still think that an SSD for your boot drive is a no-brainer,
       | but for other data storage HDDs still make sense. If the trend of
       | affordable SSDs keeps up, that view might change in the future.
        
         | grogenaut wrote:
         | So I got a good deal at $121 for my 8tb wd iron wolf reds then
        
         | wtallis wrote:
         | It's also interesting to look at the trend over time for what
         | capacity the price crossover point is at. Right now, it's
         | around 1TB, but it's been moving steadily upward ever since
         | small SSDs first started to reach "cheap" prices. Hard drive
         | spindle motors, actuators, and clean-room assembly aren't
         | getting cheaper, but every time flash gets denser the capacity
         | of a cheap SSD consisting of a controller and two or four NAND
         | dies gets bigger.
         | 
         | When you analyze that trend in light of how many consumer use
         | cases show little or no growth in capacity requirements over
         | time (due to factors like cloud storage and video streaming),
         | it's hard to see any long-term future for hard drives in
         | consumer PCs.
        
           | Gigachad wrote:
           | For the average consumer, 1TB is more than enough storage.
           | All of my photos, videos, and important documents added up
           | comes out to 50GB. Everything else is just programs and games
           | which can easily be deleted and redownloaded.
        
             | TylerE wrote:
             | Even on gigabit, many AAA games are over 100GB these days.
             | That's big enough to get annoying. My personal system has
             | 4.5TB of SSD and 8TB of HDD (Used for backups, etc), and
             | that sometimes doesn't always feel like enough - and I'm
             | not even doing video editing or anything.
        
               | Gigachad wrote:
               | No one is playing triple A games on a HDD anymore though.
               | I did the math and found it was about the same speed to
               | redownload from steam as it was to copy a game off the
               | HDD.
        
               | maccard wrote:
               | I wish you were right. Based on the profiling data I've
               | seen, plenty of people are... They shouldn't be, but they
               | are.
        
         | ms512 wrote:
         | A decent aggregator for current HDD/SSD prices is
         | https://diskprices.com/
         | 
         | It essentially backs up the parent poster's data, just lets us
         | navigate across a larger set of data.
        
       | sdenton4 wrote:
       | Curiously, I just bought an hdd for the first time in years,
       | after noticing I could get 22TB of storage for $300.
       | 
       | My use case is penalty a bit particular, though... It's really
       | just for localized copies of large datasets that exist elsewhere.
       | So it's totally ok if the drive dies, since the data lives
       | somewhere else. I doubt most people have a real need for that
       | much localized data these days.
        
         | exikyut wrote:
         | * * *
        
       | flatiron wrote:
       | Personally I just find it easier to push everything to the cloud
       | and not deal with RAIDZ and failing disk drives. Maybe I'm just
       | old.
        
         | Cyph0n wrote:
         | I have 50 TB useable in my home server. This requires a total
         | of 6 drives (raidz1) for let's say $300 each.
         | 
         | Upfront storage = $1800
         | 
         | Power consumption (for the entire server) = $20/month
         | 
         | If we bundle storage into the first year's cost, it comes out
         | to about $2000.
         | 
         | On the other hand, if you use Backblaze B2, storage alone would
         | cost $3000 per year. If you're downloading content regularly
         | (media), it adds up pretty damn quickly.
        
           | ThatMedicIsASpy wrote:
           | I can get 18TB (Toshiba MG09ACA 512e) for 260EUR (tax
           | included) which would put me at usable 90TB. The cheapest
           | drive starting at 10TB is a DC HC520 12TB SAS for 185EUR
           | 
           | I've considered building a NAS for years but I don't know why
           | I just don't do it. Maybe its just the fear of the storage
           | noise which increases a lot on high capacity drives.
        
             | Cyph0n wrote:
             | Ah a fellow TF2 player :)
             | 
             | To be honest, the noise isn't too bad with a good case. I
             | use a Define R5, but I hear the Meshify also has great
             | noise suppression.
        
         | hammyhavoc wrote:
         | Depends how much data you have. Cloud storage can be incredibly
         | expensive if you work with audio and video.
        
           | [deleted]
        
       | lockhouse wrote:
       | Modern OSes practically require an SSD. The difference in
       | performance is particularly noticeable on Windows. HDDs are great
       | for local backups still.
        
         | mirker wrote:
         | OS needs less than 100GB, though, so mixed drives seems more
         | cost effective.
        
       | wolpoli wrote:
       | HDD is losing economy of scale. I wonder when will HDD become
       | completely uncompetitive at any size in terms of $/TD.
        
       | redder23 wrote:
       | Should that not be reflect in the price? Maybe I should w8 a
       | while, I kind of plan of buying a HDD but not sure what size.
        
         | loeg wrote:
         | It is very much reflected in prices.
        
       | Brian_K_White wrote:
       | And everyone's data losing bits on all those ssd's.
        
         | hnuser123456 wrote:
         | I had a Crucial SSD with a silicon bug in ~2013 and haven't
         | chosen them for storage since then. Gave them a lot of money
         | for RAM before that though.
        
         | TylerE wrote:
         | I've had far fewer (read: zero) issue with the dozen or so SSDs
         | I've personally had over the past decade or so. The same is not
         | true for hard drives. Having no moving parts really eliminates
         | a lot of failure modes.
        
       | mastax wrote:
       | The 14TB HGST Ultrastar DC HC530 drives I bought in server builds
       | eighteen months ago (delivered one year ago) have gone down from
       | $330 to $200 in that time period. Pretty amazing. 16-20TB drives
       | are starting to lose their premium as well[0].
       | 
       | SSDs may have dropped even further. I had to unsubscribe from
       | /r/buildapcsales[1] because I couldn't stop buying the SSD deals
       | that popped up. I wanted to avoid juggling multiple storage
       | drives in this machine, but now all my M.2 slots are full. Stuck
       | one in a cheap USB enclosure to make a damn good flash drive.
       | 
       | QLC drives are starting to approach HDD prices. Here's an extreme
       | example. Two months ago $100 was a good deal for a 2TB QLC
       | drive[2]. Now you can get them (in limited circumstances) for
       | $45[3].
       | 
       | [0]: https://pcpartpicker.com/products/internal-hard-
       | drive/#f=2&s...
       | 
       | [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapcsales/
       | 
       | [2]:
       | https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapcsales/comments/111b8n8/ssd_...
       | 
       | [3]:
       | https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapcsales/comments/12fv841/ssd_...
        
         | kevviiinn wrote:
         | If you're willing to get used you can get 14tb for 115 on eBay
         | or 16tb for 160, one hell of a steal for a homelab IMO and it
         | complements having some ssds for fast storage as well for some
         | services
        
       | blihp wrote:
       | While spinning rust was destined to lose the majority of the
       | market to flash, I think the hard disk companies accelerated the
       | move with the SMR fiasco. It got me moving more things to SSDs
       | sooner than I had planned.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-04-15 23:00 UTC)