TIA. Are hybrid HDD's any good? I was toying with upgrading a laptop I recently acquired, I would need at least a 1 TB hard drive. I don't want to spend the money on a 1TB SSD drive. I can get a 1 TB Hybrid HDD for under $65 delivered.
Hybrid HDD?
- Thread starter demarpaint
- Start date
- Status
I'd go for it! They significantly improve performance, but not immediately. How it works is caching the files you commonly access, so give it a couple weeks of using it every day to feel a big performance difference over just a typical mechanical hard drive. Just be sure you buy a "recent" model because some of the earlier hybrid drives had a fairly high failure rate.
That said, if you are willing to spend the money, an SSD is the best thing you'll ever buy. A 1TB WD Blue SSD is $127 on Amazon! I personally use at least one WD Blue SSD drive and have installed many in friends/family/client computers, and 0 failures. In fact, I've had 0 failures with name brand SSDs of all brands... WD, Intel, Crucial, Samsung, Kingston... I have experienced several failures with generic ones though!
Every single one of my computers is pure SSD at this point (except my home server which has an SSD for the OS and a 4TB HDD for all the crap I store on it) and every time I use a computer without an SSD I get frustrated LOL.
That said, if you are willing to spend the money, an SSD is the best thing you'll ever buy. A 1TB WD Blue SSD is $127 on Amazon! I personally use at least one WD Blue SSD drive and have installed many in friends/family/client computers, and 0 failures. In fact, I've had 0 failures with name brand SSDs of all brands... WD, Intel, Crucial, Samsung, Kingston... I have experienced several failures with generic ones though!
Every single one of my computers is pure SSD at this point (except my home server which has an SSD for the OS and a 4TB HDD for all the crap I store on it) and every time I use a computer without an SSD I get frustrated LOL.
Last edited:
Yesterday's tech for when SSD's were too expensive. About 3-4 years ago I paid close to $400 for a 750GB Evo840 SSD, I'm sure at that time a hybrid drive would have been a fraction of that. Now SSDs are much cheaper and the tech is better.
In your case, I'd cough up the extra $63 to get the SSD that dogememe mentioned.
I personally am done with spinning hard drives, and I was willing to pay a large premium last time. It's an easy discussion at the small premium that exists now. Get the SSD.
In your case, I'd cough up the extra $63 to get the SSD that dogememe mentioned.
I personally am done with spinning hard drives, and I was willing to pay a large premium last time. It's an easy discussion at the small premium that exists now. Get the SSD.
Hands down SSD - day and night difference for any sort of task.
Thanks for the replies. I realize SSD is better, three of my computers have one. One came with it the other two were worth upgrading to SSD, which I did. This is a laptop which in all honesty isn't really worth the extra $63 to me, that's why I asked. The HDD in it is a 5,400 rpm HDD which is beginning to show issues, otherwise I would have done nothing at all.
Originally Posted by Kode
Check newegg or amazon. 1 giggers ssds pretty reasonably priced now. Just over a hundo.
I checked before I posted. Call me cheap, lol the money I save I can spend on something else.
Check newegg or amazon. 1 giggers ssds pretty reasonably priced now. Just over a hundo.
I checked before I posted. Call me cheap, lol the money I save I can spend on something else.
I bought a Dell with a 1TB hybrid drive recently, a G3, a lower end gaming laptop. I was very unhappy with it until I swapped out the HDD for a Samsung SSD. Now, it sounds like you really don't want to spend the money on an SSD, so might as well go for the hybrid if you were happy with the computer before the issues. I did not use the hybrid long enough to see if it really helped, but it seemed no better than a standard HDD to me.
Originally Posted by WishIhadatruck
I bought a Dell with a 1TB hybrid drive recently, a G3, a lower end gaming laptop. I was very unhappy with it until I swapped out the HDD for a Samsung SSD. Now, it sounds like you really don't want to spend the money on an SSD, so might as well go for the hybrid if you were happy with the computer before the issues. I did not use the hybrid long enough to see if it really helped, but it seemed no better than a standard HDD to me.
Interesting, thanks. I'm glad you see where I'm coming from. I was seeing it as a step up from the 5,400 rpm HDD it had, something between a 7,200 rpm HDD and an SSD. I could go another $10 less and get a 2TB 7,200 rpm HDD which would double storage capacity. But I thought I'd pass on the space for the possible slight speed increase the hybrid drive theoretically offers. I've never worked with a computer that had one. After reading your comments it might pay for me to save another $10 and double my storage space.
FTR there is no doubt in my mind the SSD is the way to go, only not in this case. That I know from first hand experience.
I bought a Dell with a 1TB hybrid drive recently, a G3, a lower end gaming laptop. I was very unhappy with it until I swapped out the HDD for a Samsung SSD. Now, it sounds like you really don't want to spend the money on an SSD, so might as well go for the hybrid if you were happy with the computer before the issues. I did not use the hybrid long enough to see if it really helped, but it seemed no better than a standard HDD to me.
Interesting, thanks. I'm glad you see where I'm coming from. I was seeing it as a step up from the 5,400 rpm HDD it had, something between a 7,200 rpm HDD and an SSD. I could go another $10 less and get a 2TB 7,200 rpm HDD which would double storage capacity. But I thought I'd pass on the space for the possible slight speed increase the hybrid drive theoretically offers. I've never worked with a computer that had one. After reading your comments it might pay for me to save another $10 and double my storage space.
FTR there is no doubt in my mind the SSD is the way to go, only not in this case. That I know from first hand experience.
I thought I read a test that showed you really don't get that much of a boost.
This is one specific drive, but it's a relatively high performance HDD, and the difference isn't all that much.
https://benchspotter.com/content/seagate-firecuda-vs-wd-black-hard-drive-performance-review
I think one is better off using an SSD and if you need more space but it doesn't need to be as fast, use a traditional HDD for storage where speed isn't a primary concern.
I run a 512GB SSD as my boot and application drive and 7TB of spinning storage in my workstation at home.
This is one specific drive, but it's a relatively high performance HDD, and the difference isn't all that much.
https://benchspotter.com/content/seagate-firecuda-vs-wd-black-hard-drive-performance-review
I think one is better off using an SSD and if you need more space but it doesn't need to be as fast, use a traditional HDD for storage where speed isn't a primary concern.
I run a 512GB SSD as my boot and application drive and 7TB of spinning storage in my workstation at home.
Originally Posted by javacontour
I thought I read a test that showed you really don't get that much of a boost.
This is one specific drive, but it's a relatively high performance HDD, and the difference isn't all that much.
https://benchspotter.com/content/seagate-firecuda-vs-wd-black-hard-drive-performance-review
I think one is better off using an SSD and if you need more space but it doesn't need to be as fast, use a traditional HDD for storage where speed isn't a primary concern.
I run a 512GB SSD as my boot and application drive and 7TB of spinning storage in my workstation at home.
My two towers and 17" laptop are set up that way, the OS and programs are on the SSD and data is on HDDs. The laptop in question here only has one slot for a hard drive, so I'd like a lot of cheap room the data.
I thought I read a test that showed you really don't get that much of a boost.
This is one specific drive, but it's a relatively high performance HDD, and the difference isn't all that much.
https://benchspotter.com/content/seagate-firecuda-vs-wd-black-hard-drive-performance-review
I think one is better off using an SSD and if you need more space but it doesn't need to be as fast, use a traditional HDD for storage where speed isn't a primary concern.
I run a 512GB SSD as my boot and application drive and 7TB of spinning storage in my workstation at home.
My two towers and 17" laptop are set up that way, the OS and programs are on the SSD and data is on HDDs. The laptop in question here only has one slot for a hard drive, so I'd like a lot of cheap room the data.
I never had a chance to test a SSHD.
Last time I ripped a music CD, SSD was choking. Other than that, usual boot time speed and load the app advantage is on SSD side. I also prefer SSD when I have a VM involved.
OTOH, I have an old thinkpad with a 5400 rpm HDD, running a streaming radio for me. The boot-up is slow, but it happens once a month or so. Maxed it out with RAM, and as soon as everything is loaded it is the same as anything else.
Depends on your application. In fact, i just bought another refurbished HGST HDD from Newegg for another project. With Thinkpads it is very convenient to switch storage, and I have those cheap HDDs laying around with Windows, Linux, *BSD and even Solaris x386 for the same little guy. Don't try that on a Macbook, everything is glued and soldered there for a premium.
Last time I ripped a music CD, SSD was choking. Other than that, usual boot time speed and load the app advantage is on SSD side. I also prefer SSD when I have a VM involved.
OTOH, I have an old thinkpad with a 5400 rpm HDD, running a streaming radio for me. The boot-up is slow, but it happens once a month or so. Maxed it out with RAM, and as soon as everything is loaded it is the same as anything else.
Depends on your application. In fact, i just bought another refurbished HGST HDD from Newegg for another project. With Thinkpads it is very convenient to switch storage, and I have those cheap HDDs laying around with Windows, Linux, *BSD and even Solaris x386 for the same little guy. Don't try that on a Macbook, everything is glued and soldered there for a premium.
Originally Posted by emg
Does the laptop have a slot for an M.2 SSD? Mine has the OS on the cheapo little M.2 drive, and a second drive for all the user files (which, admittedly, I upgraded from 1TB HDD to 2TB SSD).
Unfortunately, no.
Does the laptop have a slot for an M.2 SSD? Mine has the OS on the cheapo little M.2 drive, and a second drive for all the user files (which, admittedly, I upgraded from 1TB HDD to 2TB SSD).
Unfortunately, no.
If you want a fast but non-SSD laptop hard drive, your choices are basically between a Seagate FireCuda SSHD and a 'normal' WD Black. 1TB models of each are $60-$65. Benchmarks show a small improvement across the board for the FireCuda but it's marginal, possibly even unnoticeable. The FireCuda will be cooler, quieter and use less power in a laptop due to it having a 5400rpm rotational speed vs the Black's 7200. Warranties are the same at 5 years.
That said, I've been very disappointed by Seagate's poor reliability recently. They used to be rock solid but now they have that Maxtor stink on them.
Winner: a 500GB SSD from a name brand for the same price.
That said, I've been very disappointed by Seagate's poor reliability recently. They used to be rock solid but now they have that Maxtor stink on them.
Winner: a 500GB SSD from a name brand for the same price.
You can get a 500GB SSD for $60 now. I'd not pay $68 for a 1TB hybrid (may only have a few GB of flash memory).
The problem with hybrid SSD / HDD is 1) they don't have too much SSD on it, so they aren't always faster, and 2) they are statistic based and used as cache, so you cannot decide what to use for faster and slower stuff.
I'd use a smaller SSD for boot and applications, and keep my data on an external HDD instead. Unless you are on laptop and cannot do it easily. If it has a DVD drive in the laptop you can buy on ebay a optical to HDD adapter, and put an HDD on it and put an SSD in the original HDD bay. That's what I did to my personal laptop.
The problem with hybrid SSD / HDD is 1) they don't have too much SSD on it, so they aren't always faster, and 2) they are statistic based and used as cache, so you cannot decide what to use for faster and slower stuff.
I'd use a smaller SSD for boot and applications, and keep my data on an external HDD instead. Unless you are on laptop and cannot do it easily. If it has a DVD drive in the laptop you can buy on ebay a optical to HDD adapter, and put an HDD on it and put an SSD in the original HDD bay. That's what I did to my personal laptop.
Last edited:
Sorry, I totally missed the laptop detail.
Buy once, cry once. If you plan to keep the laptop for a while, buy the SSD. While it may cost more today, I believe you get the most performance boost for the buck which may lead you to keep the laptop longer.
And if it doesn't work out with the laptop, you have a big SSD for the desktop....
Originally Posted by demarpaint
Originally Posted by javacontour
I thought I read a test that showed you really don't get that much of a boost.
This is one specific drive, but it's a relatively high performance HDD, and the difference isn't all that much.
https://benchspotter.com/content/seagate-firecuda-vs-wd-black-hard-drive-performance-review
I think one is better off using an SSD and if you need more space but it doesn't need to be as fast, use a traditional HDD for storage where speed isn't a primary concern.
I run a 512GB SSD as my boot and application drive and 7TB of spinning storage in my workstation at home.
My two towers and 17" laptop are set up that way, the OS and programs are on the SSD and data is on HDDs. The laptop in question here only has one slot for a hard drive, so I'd like a lot of cheap room the data.
Buy once, cry once. If you plan to keep the laptop for a while, buy the SSD. While it may cost more today, I believe you get the most performance boost for the buck which may lead you to keep the laptop longer.
And if it doesn't work out with the laptop, you have a big SSD for the desktop....
Originally Posted by demarpaint
Originally Posted by javacontour
I thought I read a test that showed you really don't get that much of a boost.
This is one specific drive, but it's a relatively high performance HDD, and the difference isn't all that much.
https://benchspotter.com/content/seagate-firecuda-vs-wd-black-hard-drive-performance-review
I think one is better off using an SSD and if you need more space but it doesn't need to be as fast, use a traditional HDD for storage where speed isn't a primary concern.
I run a 512GB SSD as my boot and application drive and 7TB of spinning storage in my workstation at home.
My two towers and 17" laptop are set up that way, the OS and programs are on the SSD and data is on HDDs. The laptop in question here only has one slot for a hard drive, so I'd like a lot of cheap room the data.
Originally Posted by Bottom_Feeder
If you want a fast but non-SSD laptop hard drive, your choices are basically between a Seagate FireCuda SSHD and a 'normal' WD Black. 1TB models of each are $60-$65. Benchmarks show a small improvement across the board for the FireCuda but it's marginal, possibly even unnoticeable. The FireCuda will be cooler, quieter and use less power in a laptop due to it having a 5400rpm rotational speed vs the Black's 7200. Warranties are the same at 5 years.
That said, I've been very disappointed by Seagate's poor reliability recently. They used to be rock solid but now they have that Maxtor stink on them.
Winner: a 500GB SSD from a name brand for the same price.
Thanks for the info. The 500GB SSD would be a winner, but I have over 500GB of data making it useless to me for what I would use this laptop for. I'd rather not carry around a second hard drive. My plans were to use this computer for sales calls instead of my 17" laptop which weighs a ton.
If you want a fast but non-SSD laptop hard drive, your choices are basically between a Seagate FireCuda SSHD and a 'normal' WD Black. 1TB models of each are $60-$65. Benchmarks show a small improvement across the board for the FireCuda but it's marginal, possibly even unnoticeable. The FireCuda will be cooler, quieter and use less power in a laptop due to it having a 5400rpm rotational speed vs the Black's 7200. Warranties are the same at 5 years.
That said, I've been very disappointed by Seagate's poor reliability recently. They used to be rock solid but now they have that Maxtor stink on them.
Winner: a 500GB SSD from a name brand for the same price.
Thanks for the info. The 500GB SSD would be a winner, but I have over 500GB of data making it useless to me for what I would use this laptop for. I'd rather not carry around a second hard drive. My plans were to use this computer for sales calls instead of my 17" laptop which weighs a ton.
Originally Posted by demarpaint
My plans were to use this computer for sales calls instead of my 17" laptop which weighs a ton.
Write off the entire cost of the SSD as a business expense.
My plans were to use this computer for sales calls instead of my 17" laptop which weighs a ton.
Write off the entire cost of the SSD as a business expense.
Originally Posted by Brons2
Originally Posted by demarpaint
My plans were to use this computer for sales calls instead of my 17" laptop which weighs a ton.
Write off the entire cost of the SSD as a business expense.
Food for thought.
Originally Posted by demarpaint
My plans were to use this computer for sales calls instead of my 17" laptop which weighs a ton.
Write off the entire cost of the SSD as a business expense.
Food for thought.
- Status
