Seagate Launches Third-generation of SSHD Products, Including Desktop Model

Posted on March 5, 2013 3:10 PM by Rob Williams

We reported just earlier about Seagate’s intent to cease development of its 7,200 RPM mobile hard drives, and now, with an announcement of the company’s third-generation “SSHD” products, the blanks have been filled.

Previously, Seagate’s hybrid drives fell into the Momentus XT line, but because of recent name change-ups, that’s now renamed to “Laptop SSHD”. Also, while Seagate has never offered a desktop variant of its hybrid drives in the past, that changes today, with “Desktop SSHD”. Finally, in addition to its standard 9.5mm-thick mobile drive, Seagate will also be offering a 7mm-thick option to its customers.

Seagate SSHD Family

The last iteration of Seagate’s hybrid drives included 8GB of SLC NAND, and nothing changes here. I had hoped to see a boost in that regard, as I tend to consider 20GB to be a “minimum” for caching purposes, but given the fact that this is SLC, and Seagate wants to keep pricing low, I guess it’s understandable.

While not much seems to have changed on the surface, Seagate claims that its third-gen drives prove up to 40% faster than the previous, and where laptops are concerned, overall system performance can experience a boost of up to 30% – regardless of which processor is being used.

One of the greatest benefits of Seagate’s hybrid drives is that there’s no need for software for the caching to work. That results in a drive that can experience the same benefits regardless of which OS you’re using.

Pricing hasn’t yet been announced on these new drives, but densities have been. On the desktop front, 1TB and 2TB models will be available, while on the mobile side, the 9.5mm-thick option will come in at 1TB, and the 7mm, 500GB.

  • Bob Harris

    I own the 750GB Momentus XT. It is no substitute for an SSD. The 8GB cache is way to small to be effective. That being said, it does greatly reduce your boot times over a HDD.

    Pity that Seagate didn’t at least double the cache size.

    I personally would go with a SSD for your boot drive and a conventional HDD for storage.

    • Rob Williams

      I’m glad to hear that first-hand from a user. I’ve had that exact same drive in operation since its release, but I don’t use it enough to actually notice a real-world difference. The boot times are quicker though, as you mentioned.

      And I agree, a much larger cache would have worked wonders here. The unfortunate thing is, for about 30GB of SLC, Seagate would have had to tack $75 onto the price. I’m not too sure it’d be a hot seller if that were the case.

  • Daniel Watkins

    7200RPM or nothing.

Recent Tech News
Recent Site Content