Storage media

What is it with SSHDs? Are they more or less reliable than harddrives / SSDs? I've gotten conflicting information and i have to buy 2TB of storage.

SSHD= slower overwrite, faster file opening

Life expectancy is 2-3 years longer than standard HDD

So the lower material decay outweighs the two possible points of failure?

It's a normal HDD with gigabytes of NAND instead of megabytes of DDR for cache. In terms of reliability it's RAID-0 with mismatched devices. Not hard to guess what that means.

If it's for secondary bulk storage I'd just get the regular HD.

This. SSHDs have flash cache.

It's good for static hosting.

I can't guess what that means, isn't the small usual DDR cache also a "RAID-0 with mismatched devices"?


Because of price or because of disadvantages?

No, because the DDR is volatile the NAND cache is non-volatile for quick access.
Files are dynamically allocated, at the hardware level, to and from the NAND Cache based on usage

Personally, my method is to run an SSD as primary and then run scheduled backups to a fault tolerant array of HDDs.
SSHDs were a thing for utter poorfags when SSDs were rape expensive, or when you have no capability for multiple drives, a shit tier laptop for example.

I've ordered a laptop with a 500gb nvme SSD and a 2tb SSHD. Should i cancel the order and swap the SSHD for a regular HDD or is it a good choice? The price on the SSHD was cheaper than what it, or regular 2tb HDDs, regularly cost, i guess they didn't update the prices according to the recent HDD price increase.

If the M.2 SSD is actually NVME, and not SATA, then yeah the SSHD is pointless and a 1TB 7.2k RPM SATA HDD is your best choice

It is NVME, the Samsung 960 Evo, connected via PCIe. The only thing i care about though is not if it's pointless but if the end result im getting is worse than a usual HDD, in terms of reliability, or if it doesn't matter and only the price would change.

With that good of an SSD, I'd focus on my HDD being a good and reliable as possible.

So is an SSHD less reliable? I just want that question answered

It's needless complication when not necessary, what can be done with separate dedicated devices, should be done so

SDDs are a MEME, pay twice the price for half the storage, yeah totally sounds like an excellent deal

Read/Write speed, you fucking nigerian.
SATA cripples it somewhat, due to its half duplex nature and its optimization for sequential R/W devices.
But at ~500MB/s R/W, you'd have to be utterly impoverished to not take advantage of one as at least a boot and system drive.

youre still paying more than necessary, i could understand some systems might need the speed,but i find it completely unecessary with a daily use computer.
I do believe, however than in a few years SDDs will be more useful and willl have a more reasonable price

By that logic you should have nothing but WD Green HDDs

SSDs aren't recoverable and corrupt more often.

The HDD death rate from WD, SG was 0.4%, SSDs were 0.7% (all drives tested were 128GB+)

No they don't corrupt more often, they have a different criteria than HDDs for failing. HDDs fail after a certain time of normal use, SSDs fail after a certain amount of data written to it.

SSD is a meme because they're easier manufacture than HDDs.
SSHDs are just HDDs on steroids.

Basically yoour SSD part is just for fast access and even simulate fake (RAID0) boost.


SSDs burn. Can't recover. HDD you can just replace shit and it werks unless you're using WD with proprietary boards.

Doesn't that only apply to the external self encryping HDD`s though? If so can`t one then get arround the issue by getting an internal and using a caddy?

Put a computer with the same processor, RAM, and motherboard next to each other, one with an ssd with the OS on it and one with a HDD.
Tell me you don't see a massive performance difference.

Fucking contrarian. This is probably the same retard who said that redundant PSUs are a meme in enterprise.

I have had a server with redundant psus have one fail before. Was nice to not have down time due to the failure. Didn't have anything notifying me of the outage only noticed doing maintenance.

I picked up a 1TB 850 Evo the other day. I noticed the monitoring software for my WD black is starting to bitch about too many bad sectors. This is the second HDD I'm going to have to replace in 3 years and I'm planing on using my 850 pro and the new EVO in another build soon.

Trips confirms that SSDs are the superior data storage option.

You need to practice your trolling skills on 4chan.