Haven't used a mechanical hard drive in 5 years. Only SATA SSD's and M.2 NVMe's for me.

RavenmasterHaven't used a mechanical hard drive in 5 years. Only SATA SSD's and M.2 NVMe's for me.

I have about 70TB worth of mechanical hard drives in my NAS... If I used SSDs that would get really expensive but there would be no benefit since gigabit Ethernet can only manage about 120MB/s which any mechanical drive in the last 10 years can manage.

I also have a separate server for acquiring content using Sonarr/Radarr/Nzbget and I use 4x 500GB WD VelociRaptors in RAID0 for that... Picked those up used and ended up way cheaper than a 2TB SSD... And if one of them dies and takes out my RAID array it doesn't matter since they only hold the data momentarily before it gets transferred to the NAS...

So yes while all of my computers are pure SSD and really anyone who is still using a mechanical HDD as an OS drive on anything but an infrequently used PC is either stingy or dumb, the mechanical HDD is not dead.

MusselsThe current game consoles are pretty slow for storage options (internal and external) with ~120MB/s USB 3.0 and 300MB/s internal seeming to be the current-gen maximums from details i found on reddit... so what in alabama is the point of a 12TB external drive for the xbox one?

I would love to know how that was tested. It's entirely possible that the USB 3.0 bus is on something slow, but that seems a little weird. A single USB 3.0 hub should be able to almost handle a fully SATA 6Gbit drive worth of transfer speed, assuming that the connection between the hub and the CPU isn't slower than USB 3.0. Even 1 lane of PCIe 2.0 would get you almost full USB 3.0 speed.

If you can find that reddit post again, I'd love to read it.

RavenmasterHaven't used a mechanical hard drive in 5 years. Only SATA SSD's and M.2 NVMe's for me.

So you either are very rich or you don't gather a lot of data on the way. And that is fine, really.

But mocking HDDs in general because they don't match the elitist taste of overspending gamers? :-) That's just sad.

R-T-BHell, the 360 used a 2.5" drive.

Xbox One also uses a 2.5" drive, so...?

notbSo you either are very rich or you don't gather a lot of data on the way. And that is fine, really.

But mocking HDDs in general because they don't match the elitist taste of overspending gamers? :) That's just sad.

Xbox One also uses a 2.5" drive, so...?

Elitist? You're kidding or don't know what the word means. SSD are cheap. Mass storage with an SSD isn't yet. However if you can't afford a $200 component then you shouldn't even spend any money on any hobby honestly.

Lastly, the less consumption of power and less noise is nice too when going to an SSD.

notbXbox One also uses a 2.5" drive, so...?

So it's not 3.5"

Th3pwn3rElitist? You're kidding or don't know what the word means. SSD are cheap.

Cheap compared to what? Storing data in DNA?
Something can only be "cheap" compared to an alternative. And the alternative is HDD. And SSDs are still a few times more expensive.
At some point they'll cost less and we'll throw all HDDs away.

However if you can't afford a $200 component then you shouldn't even spend any money on any hobby honestly.

Now that is just... I don't know... xenophobic? Stupid?
So you're saying that if someone can't afford expensive parts - like you can in US - he shouldn't have a hobby at all. Have I read that correctly?

Lastly, the less consumption of power and less noise is nice too when going to an SSD.

Yes, SSDs are better. We all know that.

notbNow that is just... I don't know... xenophobic? Stupid?

No, that quote in particular is elitist, but not xenophobic. It suggests that people with not much money don't deserve to have a hobby. That has nothing to do with race or ethnicity. It's like saying if you can't afford a brand new BMW, you shouldn't be driving a car. It makes no sense because there are cheaper components for those who can't afford them or don't need something more expensive.

shovenoseand really anyone who is still using a mechanical HDD as an OS drive on anything but an infrequently used PC is either stingy or dumb, the mechanical HDD is not dead.

That not completely true. Some people only want one drive in their system but want a ton of space also, in those instances they are not willing to spend the money on a 4TB SSD so a 7200rpm 4TB HDD is perfectly acceptable. Boot up times are not bad either. Modern HDD's are much faster than they used to be.

Th3pwn3rHowever if you can't afford a $200 component then you shouldn't even spend any money on any hobby honestly.

That's not for you to say for anyone other than yourself.

notbCheap compared to what? Storing data in DNA?
Something can only be "cheap" compared to an alternative. And the alternative is HDD. And SSDs are still a few times more expensive.
At some point they'll cost less and we'll throw all HDDs away.

Now that is just... I don't know... xenophobic? Stupid?
So you're saying that if someone can't afford expensive parts - like you can in US - he shouldn't have a hobby at all. Have I read that correctly?

Yes, SSDs are better. We all know that.

Cheap compared to the best performing video cards or cpu, you know relative components.

lexluthermiesterThat not completely true. Some people only want one drive in their system but want a ton of space also, in those instances they are not willing to spend the money on a 4TB SSD so a 7200rpm 4TB HDD is perfectly acceptable. Boot up times are not bad either. Modern HDD's are much faster than they used to be.

That's not for you to say for anyone other than yourself.

I can and have said what I wanted to. If you think $200 is expensive then you better save the $200. I once lived paycheck to paycheck and spent my last five bucks every week. I grew up, started making smarter decisions, started making more money and started saving more money. If I think something is expensive and it's not a good investment then I'm not buying it. I'm not a part of the 1% but if I thought $200 was a lot or expensive I definitely wouldn't be involved with PC's. Same reason I quit a lot of my other hobbies a long time ago.

AquinusI would love to know how that was tested. It's entirely possible that the USB 3.0 bus is on something slow, but that seems a little weird. A single USB 3.0 hub should be able to almost handle a fully SATA 6Gbit drive worth of transfer speed, assuming that the connection between the hub and the CPU isn't slower than USB 3.0. Even 1 lane of PCIe 2.0 would get you almost full USB 3.0 speed.

If you can find that reddit post again, I'd love to read it.

it was something about how they used the earliest lowest spec USB 3.0 available at the time, was when i was helping a friend troubleshoot issues with external SSD on Xbox (he wanted to run a 2TB SSD externally... not great planning) - this may vary between Xbox models?

Best info i've found re-checking today says 220MB/s should be the reality, cant find the posts from the guys testing show it was lower. Could be something due to the age of the console (most Xbones are only SATA II, so the internal chipsets must be pretty old)

I wonder if an hybrid with 500GB of fast storage and at least 4TB of slow storage wouldn't have been better ? until SSD manage to catch up the $/Go of hdd it's the better compromise for gaming in my opinion. Right now all I'm seeing are regular external HDD with a "premium" case.

So it's a regular drive, but they feel entitled to charge extra for it because they've written "XBOX" on the case?

It reminds me of those overpriced microsd cards from sandisk that cost 30% more because they're red and say NINTENDO SWITCH on them :laugh:

RophSo it's a regular drive, but they feel entitled to charge extra for it because they've written "XBOX" on the case?

It reminds me of those overpriced microsd cards from sandisk that cost 30% more because they're red and say NINTENDO SWITCH on them :laugh:

and they increased the WD-idle timer so they dont click constantly too :p

Th3pwn3rCheap compared to the best performing video cards or cpu, you know relative components.

Why would we compare to a CPU? It's a different component, in a different class.
CPU and GPU define performance, so they're directly defining what you can play and how well it looks during playing. This is the important part of gaming hardware.
When talking about drives, it's their size (not speed) that impacts this. Larger drive means it can hold a game in the first place. And better looking games, with higher quality graphics, take more space.

Drive speed has no effect on what you can play and how it looks. It only has some tiny comfort impact, i.e. how quickly the game loads.

A long, long time ago we already had a similar situation. In the 90s your PC disk was just few times larger than a CD.
This forced a feature during game setup, when you could have affected the installation size - by choosing the texture quality and how much of the game would be loaded from the CD on the go.

Today games are usually downloaded. Many of the mainstream titles take 50GB.
And a mainstream SSD (that fits in the budget typical consumers are willing to spend on a drive) is 250-500GB.
So after 2 decades of really not thinking about this matter, we once again have the 90s' problem: only a few games will fit.

That's why mainstream gamers still use HDDs. Because they're cheap and don't have many drawbacks.
And people that spend a lot on gaming can buy large SSD if they want. I'm not judging.
But I will always be against the kind of elitist and short-sighted comments that we've seen here.

I can and have said what I wanted to. If you think $200 is expensive then you better save the $200. I once lived paycheck to paycheck and spent my last five bucks every week. I grew up, started making smarter decisions, started making more money and started saving more money.

No offense, but how old are you?
What you've said is correct, but it's a teenage perspective. I can't afford a $200 SSD, so I won't go to the cinema 20 times and that's it.
$200 is a lot of money globally. Not everyone lives in US.
Some people simply can't afford $200 SSDs. End of story. Are you saying they shouldn't be playing games?

I'm not a part of the 1% but if I thought $200 was a lot or expensive I definitely wouldn't be involved with PC's. Same reason I quit a lot of my other hobbies a long time ago.

LOL. How exactly is PC a hobby in XXI century?
You just said that if someone can't afford a $200 part, he shouldn't own a computer. :-D

AquinusNo, that quote in particular is elitist, but not xenophobic. It suggests that people with not much money don't deserve to have a hobby. That has nothing to do with race or ethnicity. It's like saying if you can't afford a brand new BMW, you shouldn't be driving a car. It makes no sense because there are cheaper components for those who can't afford them or don't need something more expensive.

And a cheaper car can't be considered a hobby? Like an old Peugeot or something?
Why can't people with smaller budget have some pleasure? :eek:
I hope you're not serious.

And "xenophobic" means prejudice against people from other countries, not other races.

notbWhy would we compare to a CPU? It's a different component, in a different class.
CPU and GPU define performance, so they're directly defining what you can play and how well it looks during playing. This is the important part of gaming hardware.
When talking about drives, it's their size (not speed) that impacts this. Larger drive means it can hold a game in the first place. And better looking games, with higher quality graphics, take more space.

Drive speed has no effect on what you can play and how it looks. It only has some tiny comfort impact, i.e. how quickly the game loads.

A long, long time ago we already had a similar situation. In the 90s your PC disk was just few times larger than a CD.
This forced a feature during game setup, when you could have affected the installation size - by choosing the texture quality and how much of the game would be loaded from the CD on the go.

Today games are usually downloaded. Many of the mainstream titles take 50GB.
And a mainstream SSD (that fits in the budget typical consumers are willing to spend on a drive) is 250-500GB.
So after 2 decades of really not thinking about this matter, we once again have the 90s' problem: only a few games will fit.

That's why mainstream gamers still use HDDs. Because they're cheap and don't have many drawbacks.
And people that spend a lot on gaming can buy large SSD if they want. I'm not judging.
But I will always be against the kind of elitist and short-sighted comments that we've seen here.

No offense, but how old are you?
What you've said is correct, but it's a teenage perspective. I can't afford a $200 SSD, so I won't go to the cinema 20 times and that's it.
$200 is a lot of money globally. Not everyone lives in US.
Some people simply can't afford $200 SSDs. End of story. Are you saying they shouldn't be playing games?

LOL. How exactly is PC a hobby in XXI century?
You just said that if someone can't afford a $200 part, he shouldn't own a computer. :-D

And a cheaper car can't be considered a hobby? Like an old Peugeot or something?
Why can't people with smaller budget have some pleasure? :eek:
I hope you're not serious.

And "xenophobic" means prejudice against people from other countries, not other races.

In short if you can't afford a PC component that is $200 or think it's a lot of money you should save your money period. The money would be better invested in other things or saved. Everyone has their limits unless you're part of the 1%, I think a $100,000.000 is a lot of money for a car, could I buy one? Yes but it would be a stupid thing to do and my money is better used on other things. And if you don't already know most hobbies are expensive. Back to the $200 SSD...that would just be a part of a whole. Any decent computer is going to cost in the $500-$1000 range right? If that seems like a lot then PC building/PC gaming is something you should wait around for like a lot of the stories you can read on Reddit, a lot of people wait to finish college and get a good job before spending that money.

Th3pwn3rIn short if you can't afford a PC component that is $200 or think it's a lot of money you should save your money period.

That is your opinion and ONLY your opinion. There are plenty of ways to build a respectable PC without spending $200 on any one part. In fact one can quite easily build a decent gaming system for about $500 total if you're willing to be frugal.

However, we're way off-topic here..

lexluthermiesterThat is your opinion and ONLY your opinion. There are plenty of ways to build a respectable PC without spending $200 on any one part. In fact one can quite easily build a decent gaming system for about $500 total if you're willing to be frugal.

However, we're way off-topic here..

Right things can be built on budgets but do frugal people build gaming PC to begin with I think I need to read the definition of frugal. Although my millionaire uncle is super cheap he does buy some expensive models and sports memorabilia...