Seagate's Hybrid SSHDs

O

Oleg34

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 13, 2014
Messages
484
Are Seagate's Hybrid SSHDs any better in terms of reliability?.
 
Yes, I know what an SSHD is. It's what you use when you have only one SATA port available, usually in a laptop. There's no other reason to use one instead of a separate SSD for performance applications and a separate HDD for capacity storage.
 
the only experience I've had with it has been poor. The drive isn't dead, but it's really slow. I replaced it with a Sandisk pure SSD for $89 in the machine and the laptop it's on is so much better.

I did like the 1 terabyte of storage, and I"m sure it is faster than a standard drive. But it was hella slow here.
 
I have a 500GB Seagate SSHD sitting on my desk. I pulled it from a OptiPlex 9020 because it was slow as a molasses. I honestly think my USB 3.0 flash drive performed better.

I replaced the SSHD with a 850 evo and its a night and day difference. I have the 5400rpm flavor SSHD and I would not recommend one. I would prefer a plain 7200rpm HD over it.
 
MrValentine said:
I have a 500GB Seagate SSHD sitting on my desk. I pulled it from a OptiPlex 9020 because it was slow as a molasses. I honestly think my USB 3.0 flash drive performed better.

I replaced the SSHD with a 850 evo and its a night and day difference. I have the 5400rpm flavor SSHD and I would not recommend one. I would prefer a plain 7200rpm HD over it.
Click to expand...

thats the issue is was a 5400 rpm one. why buy that lol. you should get the SSHD with 7200 rpm but still they are sadly mostly useless now.
 
Nobody here has hundreds or thousands of drives to test, so none of us can really say how reliable they are.

The hybrid drives always seemed kinda gimmicky to me, the 8GB of flash memory really doesn't do much for performance. Stuff that get's cached loads faster but even a budget SSD would do circles around them. You might as well just use a dedicated SSD for the OS/apps and regular hard drives for bulk data.
 
A single NAND flash chip is not very fast all. Much like why a SD card or a USB stick is not as fast as an SSD. Because you are only writing to 1 chip at a time.

So the only advantage you have are seek times and random read times. And then you have to deal with if the random reads are all cached or not.

I have a 750GBXL that I have running in my Mac server. I've had it for several years and it's a nice drive if space is a concern or you want just a little bit extra oomph. And when I got it, SSD's were still very expensive (compared to now at least).

But it is not exceptional by any means. I was even shocked that Seagate still stuck with 8GB on the 3.5" drives. I would have fully expected to go to 16 or 32GB if solely to get parallel devices for speed purposes.

Now Western Digital actually made a REALLY cool product that I wish would have been further explored. They physically put a 120GB SSD and a 1TB HDD in the same package. And used the partition table to separate them.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7682/the-wd-black2-review

So the drive actually appears as a 1.20TB drive to the system, but the first 120GB are written to Solid State. A very cool and clever approach, but sadly it gained no traction in the market.
 
westrock2000 said:
A single NAND flash chip is not very fast all. Much like why a SD card or a USB stick is not as fast as an SSD. Because you are only writing to 1 chip at a time.

So the only advantage you have are seek times and random read times. And then you have to deal with if the random reads are all cached or not.

I have a 750GBXL that I have running in my Mac server. I've had it for several years and it's a nice drive if space is a concern or you want just a little bit extra oomph. And when I got it, SSD's were still very expensive (compared to now at least).

But it is not exceptional by any means. I was even shocked that Seagate still stuck with 8GB on the 3.5" drives. I would have fully expected to go to 16 or 32GB if solely to get parallel devices for speed purposes.

Now Western Digital actually made a REALLY cool product that I wish would have been further explored. They physically put a 120GB SSD and a 1TB HDD in the same package. And used the partition table to separate them.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7682/the-wd-black2-review

So the drive actually appears as a 1.20TB drive to the system, but the first 120GB are written to Solid State. A very cool and clever approach, but sadly it gained no traction in the market.
Click to expand...

channels is what you are referring to. My flash drive has multiple channels and is as fast as first gen SSDs (maybe faster)

https://www.dropbox.com/s/v5jwo81p4zq2wmz/test 1.png?dl=0
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top