HDD vs SSHD for RAID 1+0 - 3d Modeling

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
L

LsD1977

Reputable
Feb 8, 2015
34
0
4,530
Ok, here is the system run down:
Precision 690
1000W chassis
dual X5365 Xenon 3Ghz quad core CPus
memory risers with 64gb DDR2 Fully buffered ECC memory
PCI riser for dual graphics
Dual Quadro graphics cards (haven't decided which ones yet), non SLI for quad monitors
PREC 5i raid controller
(will be running 4 drives in RAID 1+0, just haven't chosen drives yet)

Will be used for 3D modeling, SolidWorks and AutoDesk Inventor

Is the extra cost worth it for the SSHDs? I want to run 4 2TB drives in RAID 1+0 for a total of a little under 4TB of storage. IS the performance gain worth the cost for SSHDs. I can get the SSHDs for a little over $100 each, but I can get a lot of 4 used 7,200RPM 2TB HDDs for $200. that's a big difference in cost. I'm not scared to spend some money, but only if it's worth the gain.

Thanks!
 
Solution
B
SSHD only helps for commonly accessed files, so it gives you very little benefit for jus storing your files.
Outside of as boot drive the SSHD serve almost zero benefit.
Sort by date Sort by votes
giantbucket

giantbucket

Dignified
BANNED
Nov 17, 2013
3,881
1
15,960
would it not be faster still to have a small SSD as the working/scratch drive, and a 4T single drive as the bulk storage drive? move file from bulk to scratch, work on it, and move back when done. for an office server, a RAID10 makes sense cuz you never know who's going to use which file (and by extension, the SSHD controller won't know either, so the SSHD might be pointless). for home use, you know what you'll be working on from day to day, so maybe the scratch drive is a better idea? the random-read/random-write performance of a single SSD would likely blow any HDD setup out of the water.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
giantbucket

giantbucket

Dignified
BANNED
Nov 17, 2013
3,881
1
15,960
with RAID10, if (when) one drive fails, you'll be replacing it. chances of that replacement drive of being identical to the other 3 that are still working? if you're already buying used drives, maybe 10%.

and you're also adding a drive for backups, right? cuz RAID isn't a backup in and of itself. :)

for our office server, i'm doing a RAID10 using 4 x 1T Seagate (desktop HDD.15) drives. i'm sure when one fails, i'll replace it with a newer version either 1T or 2T. invariably, i'll reach a point where i have 2 original drives, and 2 different replacement drives of larger capacity from whichever manufacturer i can get my hands on that day at my local store. it'll be a mishmash. but this is an office of 12 where there's no telling who's going to access what and when.

for a single user? hmm... personally i'd lean towards an SSD + HDD + backup. probably simpler than RAID since there's no setup required. but you gotta do what you're going to be comfortable with!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
L

LsD1977

Reputable
Feb 8, 2015
34
0
4,530
Ok, I appreciate the input. But, I am going to use a 4 drive raid 10 setup, and I want to use 2tb drives. My question is will l see any performance gains with sshd over hdd?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
manofchalk

manofchalk

Glorious
May 11, 2012
12,914
3
48,960
SSHD will probably give you a small performance advantage, if only because having an ineffective SSD cache is better than none, but nowhere near worth the price difference. Quite simply this isnt a workload that the SSHD concept is designed to work well in.
A much better solution would be to get a HDD based RAID 10 array and use the remaining cash to get a dedicated cache SSD.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom