HDD, SSD, or Hybrid?

[CaptainTom]

I am currently building a gaming PC and I was wondering what storage solution I should go with. I want to spend ~$100, but I am thinking of spending ~$160 if I have to.

Here is what I am looking at:

HDD($100):


http://www.amazon.com/Seagate-Barracuda-3-5-Inch-Internal-ST1000DM003/dp/B005T3GRNW/ref=sr_1_cc_1?
s=aps&ie=UTF8&qid=1335678694&sr=1-1-catcorr



SSD ($105):

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820211588



Hybrid($152):

http://www.amazon.com/Seagate-Momentus-7200RPM-Hybrid-ST750LX003/dp/B00691WMJG/ref=sr_1_5?
s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1336454202&sr=1-5




Both($130):

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820211588

AND

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136769

 

[cuecuemore]

Wouldn't go hybrid, would go boot/game drive(SSD) and storage HDD.

Edit: I'd get the biggest SSD you can afford right now and then get an HDD later on as the prices continue to fall. I got that exact drive you listed for $45 a year and a half ago.

 

[CaptainTom]

Wouldn't go hybrid, would go boot/game drive(SSD) and storage HDD.

Edit: I'd get the biggest SSD you can afford right now and then get an HDD later on as the prices continue to fall. I got that exact drive you listed for $45 a year and a half ago.

Which drive? Also is smart response tech any good?

 

[cuecuemore]

I'm a big fan of Mushkin drives. It looks like all of the best ones are out of stock on Newegg right now, but they have a sale on this one, which is also a top performer:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820233220&nm_mc=EMC-IGNEFL050812&cm_mmc=EMC-IGNEFL050812-_-EMC-050812-Index-_-SSD-_-20233220-L0A

I don't know too much about SSD caching and haven't used it despite running a Z68 myself. Hopefully someone else could enlighten us here, but I hear that it doesn't make too big a difference.

 

[game junky]

Go SSD for your OS - pick based on the ports you have on your motherboard. I am running a 120GB Intel 520 on my desktop and a 128GB Samsung 830 on my laptop, both have been solid in terms of performance and reliability.

Nuff said

 

[Afriporean]

I went with the SSD in my last rig I built. My issue though, is that I only wanted the OS on it, but whenever I install programs, they automatically go to the SSD. There doesn't seem to be a way to change the default installation drive for most programs.

 

[Guest]

Which drive? Also is smart response tech any good?

SRT is for smaller (64gig) SSDs. it does not provide the performance of a SSD for OS and HD for data.

i would suggest the SSD for the main drive, plenty of room for OS and games/some apps and use the platter for other apps and data.

btw, THIS SSD is MUCH better:
Crucial M4 CT128M4SSD2 2.5" 128GB $124.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148442
a adata is rather generic and may not be as reliable.
also you really would be better off with a 1TB hd with a larger cache:
Seagate Barracuda ST1000DM003 1TB $99.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148840

i know i just doubled your budget but if you can't get quality parts, your throwing your money away.

 

[rdzona]

I went with the SSD in my last rig I built. My issue though, is that I only wanted the OS on it, but whenever I install programs, they automatically go to the SSD. There doesn't seem to be a way to change the default installation drive for most programs.

Dude you must be doing something wrong because EVERY program I install has someway of directing its path.

To the OP, everyone is pretty much stating the way to go. SSD for your OS and some of your fav programs and an HDD for data storage. ssd caching is actually a legitimate way to increase your speeds, but your board has to support it. And you still need both ssd and hdd drives, and with the prices on ssd's lately, you might as well get one to stand alone. The egg just had the 128mg crucial m4 for 100 dollars on their daily deal. The prices have dropped substantially, you just have to keep your ear to the ground and watch out for them.

 

[CaptainTom]

So hybrid is out of the question. I am leaning towards getting a nice 1TB HDD 7200 64MB cache for $100 since it is all I really need and it will still boot up far faster than my current computers. This is unless it seems worth it to get a 32GB SSD and a 320GB+ HDD for around $100 combined.

Also does it really matter if an HDD is 3GB/s or 6GB/s?

 

[CaptainTom]

Dude you must be doing something wrong because EVERY program I install has someway of directing its path.

To the OP, everyone is pretty much stating the way to go. SSD for your OS and some of your fav programs and an HDD for data storage. ssd caching is actually a legitimate way to increase your speeds, but your board has to support it. And you still need both ssd and hdd drives, and with the prices on ssd's lately, you might as well get one to stand alone. The egg just had the 128mg crucial m4 for 100 dollars on their daily deal. The prices have dropped substantially, you just have to keep your ear to the ground and watch out for them.

I just wonder if it is really worth it to get a $180 180GB SSD instead of a $100 1TB HDD. This is a desktop, not a laptop after all. Will I really not regret it?

 

[foscooter]

If you have no hard drive at all right now for the new rig, get as big a drive you can (1TB ot 2TB) for now. Seagate Barracuda are good ones.

Then later you can get a SSD. Budgeting for a SSD, you may not get a large enough one for all your data, if that's all you have (just a SSD).

But a 180GB SSD is a very good start. Large enough for all programs, and room to spare.

The thing about SSD is they scale up the larger you get. 240Gb is about twice as fast as 120GB, which is about twice as fast as 60GB in 4K random reads/writes, which is what really matters.

But my 180GB Intel 520 is as fast as a 240GB model, and still twice as fast in IOPS as the 120GB model.

 

[SinisterSalad]

I've used all. I currently am running the 500GB Hybrid with 4GB cache in my desktop. It's worked as advertised with my most commonly used programs. My only issue with it is when playing larger games like BF3, it uses up my 4GB cache, so loading different maps doesn't help me. With the larger cache of the 750GB version, that should take care of that issue. Also, if you use your PC with a TV tuner and watch TV, it renders the SSD cache useless, I've found.

If you have the cash to spare, go for the SSD and HDD combo. The hybrid is a nice option to save some money if there are only a few things you do at a time.

 

[foscooter]

This is unless it seems worth it to get a 32GB SSD and a 320GB+ HDD for around $100 combined.

NO, don't do it! You need at least 60GB for OS and some programs.

Also does it really matter if an HDD is 3GB/s or 6GB/s?

No, don't spend the extra money to get a SATA III 6.0Gbps hard drive, not worth it.

ssd caching is actually a legitimate way to increase your speeds, but your board has to support it.

Your motherboard has to support it, but it not really worth it. And iRST has a 64GB limit on the size of the cache drive (SSD). A stand alone SSD is the best option as a boot/OS/program drive, with a HDD for storage.

There are SSD drives that come with software packages to cache the SSD to a HDD, like the OCZ Synapse, but these are expensive! But they do work better than iRST cache-ing option on a Z68 or Z77 chipset motherboard.

 

[xllsargellx]

Some really good advice here. Think I may have to go ahead and add and SSD to my system. I did not start the thread but sure did get the answers I needed. Now to convince the wife that I NEED this SSD...wish me luck

 

[rdzona]

If you have no hard drive at all right now for the new rig, get as big a drive you can (1TB ot 2TB) for now. Seagate Barracuda are good ones.

Then later you can get a SSD. Budgeting for a SSD, you may not get a large enough one for all your data, if that's all you have (just a SSD).

But a 180GB SSD is a very good start. Large enough for all programs, and room to spare.

The thing about SSD is they scale up the larger you get. 240Gb is about twice as fast as 120GB, which is about twice as fast as 60GB in 4K random reads/writes, which is what really matters.

But my 180GB Intel 520 is as fast as a 240GB model, and still twice as fast in IOPS as the 120GB model.

They definitely do scale, although it is not quite linearly like you implied. Maybe from a 60gb to 128gb is 2x performance, but a 256gb is not twice as fast as a 128gb. And there is essentially no performance increase from 256gb to 512gb drives.

 

[Guest]

Some really good advice here. Think I may have to go ahead and add and SSD to my system. I did not start the thread but sure did get the answers I needed. Now to convince the wife that I NEED this SSD...wish me luck

roses and chocolate helps!

 

[CaptainTom]

Best answer selected by CaptainTom.

 

[CaptainTom]

Just thought I would let everyone know I went with a 1TB HDD. If it was a netbook, an SSD would have been mandatory. However as of now, I think the 64 MB of cache will be more than enough for an acceptable boot up time of around 1 minute. Thank you all though, I have learned a lot!