# FINALLY the 3.5" sshds are HERE!!!



## kenkickr (Aug 25, 2013)

I've been waiting to grab one for the htpc.  Prices aren't that bad considering.  SSD Performance. HDD Capacity


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Aug 25, 2013)

meh only 8gb of flash on both

1TB + 8GB
2TB + 8GB


would be more interesting if they scaled it up
1TB + 8GB
2TB + 16GB
3TB + 24GB
4TB + 32GB

etc etc altho 16 32 48 64gb would be far more usefull

As it stands its cheaper to grab a cheapo SSD and 1TB drive and just use Intel's caching tech.


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 25, 2013)

16GB would have been nice, but really 8GB is enough.  The amount of files accessed when booting and starting programs for 90% of users is under 8GB.

I've been using a 2.5" 1TB SSHD in my main rig for a little over a month now and it is noticeably faster at startup and loading common programs than the standard 3.5" hard drive it replaced.



crazyeyesreaper said:


> As it stands its cheaper to grab a cheapo SSD and 1TB drive and just use Intel's caching tech.



It definitely wouldn't be cheaper.  A 1TB drive is about $60.  The cheapest SSD on newegg is $47.  That doesn't add up to be cheaper than a 1TB SSHD, not to mention you have to have a board that supports Intel's Smart Responce, which a lot of people don't.


----------



## rockit00 (Aug 25, 2013)

The 1TB SSHD should be as fast as the XT 750GB and save a little $$ to boot!


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Aug 25, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> 16GB would have been nice, but really 8GB is enough.  The amount of files accessed when booting and starting programs for 90% of users is under 8GB.
> 
> I've been using a 2.5" 1TB SSHD in my main rig for a little over a month now and it is noticeably faster at startup and loading common programs than the standard 3.5" hard drive it replaced.
> 
> ...



so $117 vs $99 

oooh $17 to go from 1TB with 8GB of cache to 1TB with 32GB of cache via SSD which is gonna have the better performance considering both are just using the SSD to cache data. 

8GB isnt enough to store the OS or even a single game it only stores the most used files for faster loading so in the end the larger capacity SSD would be a better option. 

2TB Toshiba HDD = $89.99
32GB SSD = $46.99 

Total Cost = $137

So 2TB SSHD at $139
Or 2TB HDD + 32GB SSD for $137 

So while the 1TB is $17 cheaper the 2TB option is $2 more expensive.

In the end both Seagate options are inferior performance wise.

Even without smart response Id rather just buy the actual SSD and run the OS off of it. Granted 32gb is pretty damn paltry in terms of capacity it is still enough for the OS.


----------



## Sir B. Fannybottom (Aug 25, 2013)

So does anyone have proper bench tests on these drives?


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 25, 2013)

crazyeyesreaper said:


> so $117 vs $99
> 
> oooh $17 to go from 1TB with 8GB of cache to 1TB with 32GB of cache via SSD which is gonna have the better performance considering both are just using the SSD to cache data.
> 
> ...



You don't have to store the whole OS, 90% of it is not accessed when booting.  8GB is enough for what is actually accessed when booting as well as a few programs, including games.  Though not enough for all the level/textures.


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Aug 25, 2013)

Regardless 8gb is not enough this is the third generation of their hybrid drives and they still havent gotten out of the rut yet. 

I see this as far more useful in the 2.5 inch laptop market where you cant pair an SSD and HDD together.  For desktops these really are not that great. 

That said i also doubt performance will be that great the 2nd Gen Hybrid drives offered faster OS booting but otherwise performance wise where meh they had a hard time with even 5400rpm standard HDDs. In the end its just an HDD with 8gb of nand cache Its nice feature but other than faster boots its rather worthless. If paired with WIndows 8 due to its not fully shutting down unless specifically told to this has almost 0 benefit.


----------



## erocker (Aug 25, 2013)

Anyone have one of these? Do any benchmark/file transfer with it yet?


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Aug 25, 2013)

erocker said:


> Anyone have one of these? Do any benchmark/file transfer with it yet?



I would like to see this as well.

Oh, and your avatar just went from an 8 to a 10.


----------



## rockit00 (Aug 25, 2013)

Been looking for stock, reviews and benchmarks since April. Not even the foreign sites had these drives or a clue as to when they would show up.


----------



## theonedub (Aug 25, 2013)

crazyeyesreaper said:


> meh only 8gb of flash on both
> 
> 1TB + 8GB
> 2TB + 8GB
> ...



Intel's caching software needs some updating. I purchased a Zenbook with a 32GB SSD and a 500GB 5400RPM HDD using Intel's setup and performance was poor. I would doubt that using 7200RPM drive would bring it up to acceptable levels. My intention was to test the hybrid type setup with my spare Caviar Black 2.5" 7200RPM drive, but I didn't even bother- just bought a large SSD and stuck it in there.

Maybe I am biased because I've been using a decently fast SSD in my main PC for a while now, but after using the 2 setups side by side I would definitely not recommend any Intel Express Cache or comparable software for anyone looking for SSD-like performance even if it is a cheaper solution.


----------



## Sir B. Fannybottom (Aug 25, 2013)

rockit00 said:


> Been looking for stock, reviews and benchmarks since April. Not even the foreign sites had these drives or a clue as to when they would show up.



I just noticed he changed it, I like it much more. It is very erocker. Side note, would buying a Samsung EVO still be a better choice? A 1TB drive and a 120gb SS EVO are the same price for me.


----------



## Nordic (Aug 25, 2013)

8gb is enough to make boot up fast but that's about it.


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 25, 2013)

james888 said:


> 8gb is enough to make boot up fast but that's about it.



Photoshop, Chrome, Steam, and MSI Afterburner all load much faster for me too.  But those are the programs that I always launch right after the computer starts.


----------



## ThE_MaD_ShOt (Aug 27, 2013)

Can you use a ssd of this size as the os drive? I was under the impression that 240gb was the max you wanted to use unless that has changed. To be honest I haven't kept up with it but am thinking now of moving to a ssd for my os drive. If i can use a 1tb ssd drive for the os/ programs and still maintain the performance advantage of a ssd that would be great.


----------



## Mussels (Aug 27, 2013)

ThE_MaD_ShOt said:


> Can you use a ssd of this size as the os drive? I was under the impression that 240gb was the max you wanted to use unless that has changed. To be honest I haven't kept up with it but am thinking now of moving to a ssd for my os drive. If i can use a 1tb ssd drive for the os/ programs and still maintain the performance advantage of a ssd that would be great.



what? you can use any drive, i think TB is recommended due to BIOS not supporting it (UEFI does)



sure people recommend a smaller partition so you dont have to reinstall EVERYTHING if you format, but thats not a requirement.


----------



## ThE_MaD_ShOt (Aug 27, 2013)

I though I read something somewhere that over 240gb there was some issue with trim or something. I could be wrong. And if I can use a bigger ssd for the main drive and keep the great speed that would be cool.


----------



## Mussels (Aug 27, 2013)

ThE_MaD_ShOt said:


> I though I read something somewhere that over 240gb there was some issue with trim or something. I could be wrong. And if I can use a bigger ssd for the main drive and keep the great speed that would be cool.



TRIM doesnt apply, this is not an SSD.


----------



## ThE_MaD_ShOt (Aug 27, 2013)

Ah thats where I am getting confused. Thanks for clearing that up. I though it was a ssd. These drives seem to may be what I am looking for.


----------



## Mussels (Aug 27, 2013)

its a mechanical drive with an 8GB cache instead of the usual 32MB these days.


----------



## ThE_MaD_ShOt (Aug 27, 2013)

Do we need to wait and see real world performance to see if they are worth it over a standard platter drive with 32mb of cache?


----------



## Mussels (Aug 27, 2013)

ThE_MaD_ShOt said:


> Do we need to wait and see real world performance to see if they are worth it over a standard platter drive with 32mb of cache?



they're hard to benchmark. basically, you have a chance of SSD performance on most used files - say, windows.

if you play a game too big to fit in the cache, it wont load any faster. i guess it all comes down to how they set the cache up - if it loads all the small files and the mechanical part only does the big ones, then it should improve latency a lot.


----------



## ThE_MaD_ShOt (Aug 27, 2013)

Thanks for the info Mussels you have really helped me in my quest for a new drive setup.  I am running 3 1tb standard platter drives now, but I want to get some more speed from the main drive.


----------



## Athlon2K15 (Sep 12, 2013)

Kenkickr, did you end up grabbing one of these drives? I have the 2TB capacity in house if you want any benchmark numbers.


----------



## kenkickr (Sep 12, 2013)

AthlonX2 said:


> Kenkickr, did you end up grabbing one of these drives? I have the 2TB capacity in house if you want any benchmark numbers.



No I didn't.  I was going to but now have to wait til X-mas.  I wouldn't be very interested though


----------



## Athlon2K15 (Sep 13, 2013)

just let me know what benches you want and ill post them.


----------



## kenkickr (Sep 13, 2013)

I was thinking of getting 3-5 for my media server/ Server 2012 test server so really interested in real world data transfers of say 2-50gb files.


----------



## Athlon2K15 (Sep 13, 2013)

kenkickr said:


> I was thinking of getting 3-5 for my media server/ Server 2012 test server so really interested in real world data transfers of say 2-50gb files.



Ill give you the full suite. Check back here tomorrow afternoon.


----------



## phanbuey (Sep 13, 2013)

Seems like the worst of both worlds.


----------



## FX-GMC (Sep 13, 2013)

AthlonX2 said:


> Ill give you the full suite. Check back here tomorrow afternoon.



Sub'd


----------



## Athlon2K15 (Sep 13, 2013)




----------



## Mussels (Sep 14, 2013)

AthlonX2 said:


> http://img.techpowerup.org/130913/01.png
> 
> http://img.techpowerup.org/130913/02.png
> 
> ...



thanks, that explains what i was saying earlier in a nice graph format.


----------



## newtekie1 (Sep 16, 2013)

Just a cool video on these.


----------

