Was curious about ssd and hdd comparison

You should get one of each...:lol:

SSD for OS and applications, HDD for all that other stuff that does not fit on the SSD.
250GB SSD + 1 or 2TB HDD.

Think about is this way

An HDD is mechanical has to spin like a record player to find your data.

An SSD is 100% electric so there is no delay, the data is just there.

Do what Usaf said, thats the ideal storage setup.

Depends on budget really. But if you could only afford either a 256GB ssd or a 4TB HDD, take the HDD. Really a waiting 4 secs longer for a game to load beats having to delete a game to load another.

unless you play open world game like gta 5. Then ssd will load also help load faster

SSDs do great benchmarks. Other than that, hard to really get excited about anything:

if ya look at the things that are used to show just how fast SSDs are ... and there is no denying that they are, you will find that the net impact on the user is small. Windows Boot Time:

SSD = 15.6 seconds
SSHD = 16.5 seconds
HD = 21.2 seconds

If that 0.9 or 5.6 seconds will change ya life in any way, then that's a reason to "go there" .... if you are going to try and make a productivity argument to your boss that you will be more productive in any way, well just don't even try to "go there".

Another way to see a real difference is for example copy pasting 500 GB of files or opening Chrome w/ 100 windows. I just don't see needing to do that often enough to "justify" that as a "need"/. Now if you doing rendering, video editing, animation on a workstation, it is very easy to justify the investment. Outside of those apps, it is extremely hard to justify via cost analysis in a production environment.... if that matters.,.. and for most it won't.

But that being said, as the cost is often inconsequential, I just buy one or more SSD and SSHD anyway. Our main application is AutoCAD it takes the exact same amount of time to load our largest file off the SSD or SSHD. Using office apps, if you use along script which links together a cupla 100 operations, you can show a significant performance difference. But to do those things as a human, each step required KB / mouse input in between and that eliminates any speed advantage. Same with boot time, if ya watch folks in an office... after they start their machine, more than half the time, they are not even in their chairs when the password entry screen appears. An analogy oft put forth is, if we are neighbors and both leave for work at the same time, me in the Porsche and you in the diesel jetta, who gets to work first ? Sure the Porsche can do 160 but not with in rush hour traffic w/ 55 mph speed limits. Unless you are in a situation where the main bottleneck (the user) does not apply, the faster performance will have little observable impact.

Another think to consider .... getting a SSD for OS and programs / utilities and then having all ya games and files on a HD ... well that just means that game loading and file loading will remain unchanged. So keep in mind what you want to go faster and where that stuff will fit.

We conducted blind testing (2 tests / 5 users / 6 weeks) and when we switched out the SSDs for SSHDs and HDs, no one noticed. But if the budget is there, by all means get an SSD, an SSHD or both. But if getting that means you have to downgrade to a lower cost GFX card, I'd get the better card.