Well, shit. What's /g/'s opinion on hybrid drives?

>>55773299
The SSDs are becoming dirt cheap.

No need to settle down for a hybrid unless you're poor.

Just get an SSD for OS/frequently used programs and an HDD for storage.

>>55773329

I'm semi-poor, but I should have at least a few months before shit breaks down, no?

>>55773299
Stupid gimmick. Combine the unreliability of flash memory with a mechanical drive and you got yourself a turd.

If you want SSD, buy SSD.
If you need storage space, buy a HDD.

>>55773299
I've never used one but I don't think they would be a good idea. SSDs thrive on being larger, and having free space. A small SSD is basically a glorified flash drive. So a few gigs on a hybrid that's expected to be full all the time and thus unable to trim effectively, would be the worst use of the technology, and would probably be prone to dying young. And then if you don't end up with the right files on the ssd portion then the whole thing is pointless anyway.

On a laptop SSHD's are great compared to the regular HDD's.
Havent experienced them in terms of desktops though.

>>55773646
Why wouldn't you just get an SSD?

>>55773702
because for the price of a 500GB SSHD i might be able to only get a 120GB SSD

>>55773702
>Cost
>Size
>Speed

It was pick 2 before, and hybrids try to bridge that.

>>55773746
Sure, but they combine every problem that SSDs have with every problem that HDDs have to make a turd sandwich. So you're just getting something that is good at nothing.

I think it would have to come down to failure rate. If it turns out that they defy all the normal rules of SSDs and last as long as normal drives, then even the minor benifit would probably appeal to most people if you really needed a bigger drive on a budget.

>>55773299
Almost as shit as anything made by Seagate.

>>55773741
Yeah, and for the price of a 120GB SSD you get a 500GB HDD + 24GB SSD instead
great deal

>>55773299

120-256 GB SSD for the OS and software

1TB (or whatever size fits your needs) HDD for storage

The only acceptable solution. No need for a hybrid gimmick.

>>55773913
Ok deal. The smaller an ssd is the slower it is. The only reason ssd's are faster than hard drives is distributed writing over multiple cells. It's like having a bunch of flash drives in raid

>>55773952

this. also hello 2 years ago i would like my time back thank you bye

>>55773299
>>55773329
>>55773360
>>55773447
>>55773447
>>55773479
>>55773628
>>55773646
>>55773702
>>55773741
>>55773746
>>55773768
>>55773836
>>55773897
>>55773913
>>55773952
>>55773955
>>55774019
buy 16-32 gb or ram
enable disk cache and disable buffer flushing
you'll never need an SSD or hybrid drive. enjoy your low cost 1-2 TB drive

>>55773913
its not a "24GB SSD" its fucking flash memory for cache. You as a user have no access to the flash memory. Its just for cache and id say it IS a great deal.

>>55774067
How in the hell is that supposed to help you with read times? Or your boot time? I can see the advantages of ram disk for carefully chosen tasks but I wouldn't expect it to play out very well as a general purpose cache

>>55774197
windows has prefetch and superfetch. also, you dont need high read times and boot times, just dont reboot your computer. ssd is upselling. I bought one. I dont need one. All you need is ram.

>>55774270
RAM is way the hell more expensive than an SSD still, anon.

I think an SSHD would be good for building for a computer for a tech-illiterate because they wouldn't need to concern themselves with worrying about different partitions. That's assuming they have the budget for a large SSD, in which case you could just use a large SSD with no mechanical storage.

>>55774337
>building for a computer for a tech-illiterate
Such as yourself, for instance?