Final Words

The storage market in the first quarter of 2016 performed in accordance with the PC market trends in general. Shipments of HDDs went down, but sales of high-capacity nearline hard drives remained a bright spot in the reports of leading hard drive suppliers. Western Digital remains optimistic in the short term for HDDs, but Seagate detailed plans to severely cut its production capacities and to reduce its presence the market of low-end mobile HDDs.

As ultra-thin notebooks, as well as 2-in-1 hybrid PCs, are gaining market share, the potential for 2.5” client HDDs suffers. Theoretically, sales of 2.5” drives for AIO and small form-factor desktops could offset declines in the mobile (at the expense of 3.5” HDDs declines), but this did not happen in Q1: sales of Seagate’s 2.5” client HDDs dropped to 10.6 million units (down 37% YoY), whereas shipments of Western Digital’s 2.5” client drives declined to 13.577 million units (down 28% YoY).

This quarter Seagate announced plans to discontinue some of its 2.5” low-capacity (500 GB and lower) client drives and concentrate on promoting 1 TB and 2 TB 2.5” models based on its latest technologies. Basically, Seagate no longer wants to compete against entry-level TLC NAND-based SSDs in low-end and mainstream notebooks. Reducing participation in this market segment will allow Seagate to simplify the portfolio of components it purchases from other makers and cut down its costs as high-capacity platters for advanced drives are made mostly in-house. It will be very interesting to see how other HDD makers respond to this action. They face similar problems and eventually it will only get harder to compete against cheap SSDs.

Shipments of 3.5” client hard drives hit a new low in the first three months of this year, which was not completely surprising, given slow shipments of PCs. So far neither Seagate nor Western Digital has announced plans to optimize their 3.5” lineups (WD actually folded its Green drives into its Blue lineup last year), but this is something that will likely happen in the future.

Enterprise HDD business is a mixed bag these days. On the one hand, sales of 10K and 15K HDDs are declining because of SSDs and that decline has yet to bottom out. Yet, those hard disks remain expensive and the business overall is profitable. On the other hand, sales of nearline drives are on the rise. More importantly, the growth of average capacities of such HDDs even outpaces the growth in their unit sales. Interestingly, Seagate indicated that demand for high-end 8 TB nearline HDDs was so strong in Q1 2015 that it could not even fulfill the orders placed. Seagate’s rather unexpected start of 10 TB HDD revenue shipments in April proves that operators of data center are rapidly building up capacities.

Seeing the fact that HDD sales volumes have been falling for many quarters now, Seagate not only decided to exit the market of low-end notebook drives but also detailed its plans to steeply cut-down its manufacturing capacities to 35 – 40 million units per quarter from 55 – 60 million units per quarter. From now on, the company will focus on high-capacity HDDs that are sold at higher prices rather than on affordable drives for bulk storage, which will naturally help it to avoid direct competition against SSDs in the entry-level segment where capacity may not be that important. It remains to be seen what Seagate will do with the manufacturing equipment that it will not need after its optimizations, but that is a different conversation entirely.

Looking ahead, Western Digital believes that the HDD TAM will remain above a psychologically important 400 million units per year mark (shipments of HDDs last year were around 453.6 million units), but will drop in the long term. Meanwhile, Nidec conservatively predicts that HDD TAM will fall to 400 million units in 2016 with shipments of PC and external HDDs declining the most. The upcoming quarters will show whether optimistic or conservative predictions are applicable to today’s HDD market.

Methodology and Important Notices

There are three major manufacturers of hard drives today: Seagate, Toshiba and Western Digital. Other suppliers are reselling hard drives made by these three companies.

Seagate and Western Digital reveal their HDD unit shipments as well as TAM (total available market) estimates every fiscal quarter. While such numbers are considered preliminary, they are usually rather accurate and re-affirmed by third-party analysts. Our TAM is the midpoint between Seagate’s and Western Digital’s TAM estimates. If only one hard drive maker reveals its TAM, we consider the number from only one vendor.

Meanwhile Toshiba does not officially disclose its HDD shipments. We subtract quarterly shipments of Seagate and Western Digital from our TAM estimate to get the number of drives sold by Toshiba. The approach is is the reason why we do not report historical shipments of Toshiba prior to Q3 2012. Based on estimates of hard drive makers and industry observers, Toshiba cannot produce more than 22 – 23 million of HDDs per quarter.

Seagate’s and Western Digital’s fiscal quarters end on the last business day of the last week of a calendar quarter (e.g., the Friday next to December 31). While fiscal quarters of HDD makers may not correspond exactly to calendar quarters, they are very close. Fiscal years of Seagate and Western Digital do not correspond to calendar years as they begin in July.

Historical TAM data comes from financial reports of Seagate and Western Digital.

Note 1: Seagate completed the acquisition of Samsung’s HDD business in December, 2011. The company started to include sales of Samsung-branded HDDs in its quarterly shipments in Q1 2012 (Q3 FY2012).

Note 2: Western Digital closed the acquisition of Hitachi Global Storage Technologies in March, 2012. Western Digital began to include HGST shipments in its financial reports in Q2 2012 (Q4 FY2012).

Note 3: Toshiba acquired some of Western Digital’s 3.5-inch HDD manufacturing equipment and intellectual property in May, 2012. It was expected that the manufacturing transfer could be complete within 6 to 12 months. Western Digital made HDDs for Toshiba on a contract basis until late Q4 2012. Due to the contract manufacturing agreement between Western Digital and Toshiba in 2012, there may be some inaccuracies in the historical data in that period (i.e., since the drives were made by Western Digital and then sold to Toshiba, they are attributed to the former, not the latter).

Note 4: Seagate defines client HDDs as 2.5” and 3.5” hard drives for desktops, notebooks and hybrid PCs as well as game consoles. Seagate considers HDDs for external storage and network-attached storage (NAS) as “branded” drives. Hard disks for DVRs and surveillance systems belong to Seagate’s family of HDDs for consumer electronics. Enterprise lineup includes 2.5” and 3.5” drives for mission critical (SAS, SCSI, Fibre Channel), enterprise storage, nearline and other datacenter applications.

Note 5: Western Digital attributes desktop and mobile 2.5” and 3.5” hard drives to client HDDs. External hard drives and NAS are referred to as “branded products”. Western Digital’s consumer electronics HDDs are used in DVRs, game consoles, video streaming applications and security video recording systems.

Unit Sales of Enterprise HDDs Decline, But There Is a Catch
Comments Locked

116 Comments

View All Comments

  • yannigr2 - Thursday, May 12, 2016 - link

    I have enough space to not buy a hard disk drive the next 2-3 years. I think I bought my last HDD 2 years ago. Probably this is the case with most people and with SSDs taking the place of boot drives, HDD companies are losing the low capacity market.

    For most people who build new systems, they wouldn't know what to do with all that space a 240GB SSD will offer them. No second HDD for them, not to mention that a 128GB USB flash drive sometimes will do the trick, if they need to clean up some space from their SSD, without having to call the technician to install the HDD. On the other hand, people who need space will go for one 4TB or bigger drive, probably external, instead of buying more HDDs with lower capacities to put into their PC case.

    Old PCs have enough capacity, new PCs go for an SSD or just a single high capacity HDD, instead of many with lower capacity.
  • Gigantopithecus - Thursday, May 12, 2016 - link

    This. Last year I built about 30 desktop computers for typical home users (i.e., office/light productivity, HTPC, and gaming rigs) - three had a spinning hard drive in them. The average user is usually fine with a 250ish GB SSD, and if they run short on room, I tell them to buy a pair of 64GB USB flash drives for $20-30 total.

    Anton mentions the rise of 4K video as potentially spurring more sales of higher capacity hard drives, but I rarely have anyone ask about how to store even BR-D-quality video, so I'm skeptical that 4K will become a serious driver of increased household storage needs this decade. (At least at the consumer level.)
  • bill.rookard - Thursday, May 12, 2016 - link

    The thing is, even if some small percentage do wind up needing more storage (unlikely), many routers these days do actually offer a USB port for attaching and providing access to a HDD. That means even if they have multiple computers or devices, they don't need more than one large capacity HDD for a single household. Heck, you can get a 4TB Seagate external 2.5" hdd (actually twin 2TB's with a USB -> SATA RAID) for $150 at the local Walmart.

    The net result in the massive increase in HDD storage capacity along with the rise of the medium capacity (250-500GB) SSD means that your average household has gone from multiple HDDs in their laptops/computers to a single central HDD.

    Of course, there are exceptions (I have about 30TB of storage here, but I'm an extreme edge case...) so this will continue to be the trend. Your average storage capacity needs for an entire household are increasing far slower than the average increase in HDD capacity vs price.
  • JeffFlanagan - Thursday, May 12, 2016 - link

    Is 30TB really an extreme edge case? Anyone with a serious video collection will surpass that pretty quickly, and if they're using a DrivePool, they'll use at least 60TB in drive space to store that 30TB.
  • OVerLoRDI - Thursday, May 12, 2016 - link

    Or Plex people
  • Lolimaster - Friday, May 13, 2016 - link

    Just a collection of movies, anime (h264/HEVC quality) comics andmanga and you're looking at 30TB's for storage in a matter of a few years.
  • Michael Bay - Monday, May 16, 2016 - link

    >using hevc before our Lord and Savior Daiz ordered us to

    Blasphemer.
  • Gigaplex - Friday, May 13, 2016 - link

    I have a storage array of 9TB usable capacity. Of all the people I know personally, only my brother has a larger storage array. While it's quite easy to get larger than that now, it's definitely not common. So yes, I'd definitely consider 30TB to be an extreme edge case in the grand scheme of things.
  • azazel1024 - Friday, May 13, 2016 - link

    Yeah, I have to agree with you Gigaplex. I consider my library to be pretty generous. I probably have something like ~500 movies and maybe 30-40 TV series (granted most are just 1-2 seasons, but some are 5-8), plus some music and pictures (and not JPEGs, but a LOT of RAW images since I am a photographer, even if not a professional). Currently on my 6TB array (5.4TiB formatted) I have 2.86TiB free. I still have some older SD content (or there IS no HD version) where I only have the DVD that I ripped and a lot of my BR collection I only ripped at 720p, but right now I am at about 10% 1080p, 50% 720p and 40% 480p content.

    I wouldn't consider that a small collection, but I don't need anything like 30 terabytes of storage. Maybe if my entire collection was BDMVs instead of transcoded down files. There gets to be a point though where that is kind of ridiculous to do and is absolutely not "common". Hell, I probably represent 1% of computer users as it is, the ones who have all of their DVDs and BRs in unreduced files are probably 1% of the 1%.

    At my rate of growth, I've figured I have about 3-4 more years before I need to worry about storage at all (I don't like having less than ~20% free capacity, or about 1TiB free in this case) and maybe somewhat longer as I do occasionally cull my collection when I realize I haven't watched a movie or something since I bought it years ago, so it gets wiped and I either donate the BR/DVD or I'll just stuff it in a box and forget about it. My collection growth is still positive though, but we are talking maybe 20-40GiB a month (buy a few BRs a month, pictures I've taken, etc.), maybe .5TiB a year.

    I doubt it'll happen, but some of me hopes that TLC/3D NAND SSDs are cheap enough by the time I am hitting my self imposed limits just to replace spinning disks in my desktop and server (data is mirrored between them and on 2x3TB RAID0 arrays, plus an external 5TB USB3 disk as a 3rd copy). Probably still too expensive, but I can hope the prices are lower enough and I have the budget to pony up $500-700 to replace the disks in both machines with SSDs (hoping and figuring maybe in 4 years the price of cheap SSDs has dropped under 5 cents per GB). Even if SSD storage is <20%, the beauty there is they are so much faster, no worries about arrays and I can just create a storage pool and add SSDs to it as capacity starts hitting <10% free.

    I only have 2Gbps throughput on my network right now (SMB Multichannel, dual 1GbE links). Though I am also hoping in 4 years 2.5GbE or 5GbE networking gear will be on the market...so even SSDs might be a bottleneck on my network some day (but I think I can probably live with that. I'd love multi GB/sec throughputs on my network, but I am barely realistic enough to know I don't actually need it at all, 200+MB/sec is plenty and not worth the cost to try to realize more than 300 or 400MB/sec in the next few years).
  • Wolfpup - Thursday, July 14, 2016 - link

    Oh yeah, RAW images...I wasn't even thinking about that. If you're any kind of remotely serious photographer you'd need gigantic piles of storage too.

    I remember like early 2000s I had like an 80GB drive in my main system, which was fine. Storage requirements have just absolutely ballooned since then though, while it seems like the rate of drive size increases has massively slowed.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now