Hybrid Drive

It's mostly a meme

Yeah I got 20 of them in my raid server, with additional 5 SSD for my OS and as cache. They are really good for their performance/cost, get them if you don't want to skimp out on money

I never heard good things about hybrid drives.

>>61561393
I just heard this guy
>>61560375

If I want more storage but don't want to pay SSD prices?

I currently have a 1TB SSD in my desktop but I'm considering one of these when I need more space.

Do you understand how they work?

They load data initially at HDD speeds and temporarily store it in a solid state cache.

Depends on what you use it for man.

>>61561450
Wouldn't it be better to get an HDD if you're just gonna use it for more space?

File: EEs0cli.gif (278KB, 373x373px) Image search: [Google]

278KB, 373x373px

What happens if you use two SSHD in raid 0 with an Optane cache
Double double cache(tm)

>>61561497
I might put some games on it because computer games are fucking massive these days. All my regular data is on my NAS.

>>61560029
The issue with them has been the price compared to the alternatives. They only have an 8GB cache which is enough to speed up most of what you do, but it's still lacking. When they came out I think the landscape looked like this:
1TB drives were $55
SSHD was $90
256GB SSDs were $110.
That $35 was a good ways towards an entire 25% more storage at much greater speeds.
Now it seems to be slightly better, but still not great:
1TB for $45
SSHD for $68
256GB SSD for $85.

So it's now closer to the regular drive and the price differential is greater compared to buying a SSD, but since the initial rollout was so cool everyone's anchored on the SSD + HDD setup and we don't have enough of a base of SSHD users to even tell us how they stack up.
The difference between a SSD and a HDD isn't even that great, which probably explains why nobody is talking about hybrids.

I've been curious, what happens when the flash portion dies? Will it still work as a reliable standard HDD?

How are hybrid drives not just drives with a larger cache?

>>61562386
Marketing.

>>61560029
Seagates usually have a high failure rate

File: Screenshot_9.png (86KB, 712x281px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 712x281px

>>61560029
But I do

>>61562386
Regular cache is only a small read-ahead and storage of a bit of what was recently read. The SSD cache both does that and acts like Superfetch in that it actively fetches often used data and stores it in the flash.

>>61562431
No they don't.

Can I just use a 128gb 960 pro pci-e ssd as a cache for my 4tb 128mb 7200rpm hdd?

>>61560029
I put one in a ps3, it works great. It could also be good for a mom build.

Imagine getting a tiny ass ssd with an hdd in one package so it'd be harder to replace a faulty part. Basically pointless considering how:
you can just buy a small (140gb) ssd and just use it
or get an ssd with hdd for big files