SSD vs SSHD vs HD?

A place to talk about GPUs/Motherboards/CPUs/Cases/Remotes, etc.
Post Reply
seanbperiod

Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2014 12:56 am
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

SSD vs SSHD vs HD?

#1

Post by seanbperiod » Sat Jul 16, 2016 3:23 pm

I have an alienware alpha which has 1 2.5" slot.

Would having a Samsung Evo 850 to record to kill the drive? If so, would it be better to get the SSHD hybrid drive?

User avatar
Doctor Feelgood

Posts: 331
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 12:37 pm
Location: NJ

HTPC Specs: Show details

#2

Post by Doctor Feelgood » Sat Jul 16, 2016 10:04 pm

If you are just recording to it - I would maximize the size and value and get a standard hard drive. SSD won't be much benefit to just recording, and SSHDs aren't really that much faster than an HDD for something like that, either.

Is the main OS drive an SSD?

seanbperiod

Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2014 12:56 am
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#3

Post by seanbperiod » Sat Jul 16, 2016 10:07 pm

Well I was thinking if I compromise with SSHD, I'd get the benefits of apps loading faster, without killing the drive. The main OS and recordings would be on the same drive.

Bryan

Posts: 203
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:37 am
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#4

Post by Bryan » Sun Jul 17, 2016 2:26 pm

Every SSHD I've used has failed earlier than it should have. That's not to say it was immediate, but within two years I've had to replace them, plus the performance wasn't that much better - much closer to an HDD than an SSD. A plain SSD should be fine for it anymore, apart from paying more for the capacity.

User avatar
Cup

Posts: 51
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:03 pm
Location: Motor City, MI

HTPC Specs: Show details

#5

Post by Cup » Mon Jul 18, 2016 2:15 am

seanbperiod wrote:Well I was thinking if I compromise with SSHD, I'd get the benefits of apps loading faster, without killing the drive. The main OS and recordings would be on the same drive.
Don't do this.
SSD for the system drive (OS, programs), and a big spinning drive to record to.

The machine will be far more responsive separating the two. And, you get the great cost-per-GB of a spinning drive for mass storage (recording), and the performance-per-$ of an SSD (for the system drive.)
-Cup
~~Nearly every day of my life is some kind of computer hell....

Click here for my system specs

User avatar
Doctor Feelgood

Posts: 331
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 12:37 pm
Location: NJ

HTPC Specs: Show details

#6

Post by Doctor Feelgood » Mon Jul 18, 2016 1:14 pm

Sorry - I thought you meant you had room for one more 2.5". If you can not separate the OS from the recordings internally, I might suggest an SSD inside and an external drive for the recordings. Even if you record to the SSD, either setup a move script or a manual step to move them to the external for playback. A USB 3.0 would work fine, or maybe a networked array.

I have a Seagate SSHD in one system... it isn't that exciting. But, I do like the way prices of SSDs are going... Still a ton of money, but plenty of 960GB SSD's for under $200 these days.

User avatar
IT Troll

Posts: 1172
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 9:42 am
Location: Edinburgh, UK

HTPC Specs: Show details

#7

Post by IT Troll » Tue Jul 19, 2016 2:24 pm

You can get a dual drive which is both an SSD and a HDD in a single 2.5" drive. The HDD shows as a separate partition once the drivers are installed. You do pay a bit of premium for this though.

SSHDs do give you a slightly faster boot time, but other than that it is hard to spot much difference over a standard HDD.
Are you a Recorded TV HD user or want to give it a try? Check out the new community-made update; Recorded TV HD v2.1.1

User avatar
Doctor Feelgood

Posts: 331
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 12:37 pm
Location: NJ

HTPC Specs: Show details

#8

Post by Doctor Feelgood » Tue Jul 19, 2016 11:22 pm

IT Troll wrote:You can get a dual drive which is both an SSD and a HDD in a single 2.5" drive. The HDD shows as a separate partition once the drivers are installed. You do pay a bit of premium for this though.
I kept waiting for the WD Black2 thing like you described to come down in price... Still way too much (@ $280), but it is rather convenient to have a 120GB SSD and a 1TB HDD in a single 2.5" drive.

Bryan

Posts: 203
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:37 am
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#9

Post by Bryan » Wed Jul 20, 2016 2:16 pm

For some reason when I first read this, I thought it was a laptop. For a desktop, I'd just go with an external. Alternatively, I know it's a small system, but if there are two SATA ports, an SSD won't care if it's hanging loose somewhere or attached with duct tape. Toss it in the box and use the mount for the 2.5" hard drive.

sbaeder

Posts: 161
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2013 4:56 am
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#10

Post by sbaeder » Wed Jul 20, 2016 9:46 pm

OR, if you have the ability to put in a SSD using the M.2 PCIe interface (all but the lowest end model offer that as a disk option) use that for the OS, and a 1TB drive for recordings...

Venom51

Posts: 568
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 7:12 pm
Location: Cumming,GA

HTPC Specs: Show details

#11

Post by Venom51 » Wed Aug 03, 2016 2:16 am

Here is a neat trick I just pulled off at home. I swapped the spinning platters in my little Acer REVO clients for SSD's. I then built an iSCSI target on one of my Windows servers down stairs for each of the 5 clients that are 100 gigs each. I then attached those iSCSI targets to each client. I then mapped the normal "C:Users\Public\Recorded TV\TempRec" folder to the new iSCSI drives. Now I have the best of both worlds. The speed of the SSD in the client and a long wearing buffer drive on a spinning patter in the server. There is zero activity on my SSD while watching TV. Works perfectly and should provide long life for the SSD.

If you don't have a Windows server at home this could be done on a Freenas server or one of the little iSCSI capable NAS devices. You could even drop Freenas on older machine you don't use just to host the iSCSI targets.

User avatar
Scallica

Posts: 2797
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 7:09 pm
Location: USA!

HTPC Specs: Show details

#12

Post by Scallica » Wed Aug 03, 2016 2:59 am

Interesting. Did you put the iSCSI traffic on a separate VLAN? or is the iSCSI traffic co-mingled?
HTPC Enthusiast / Forum Moderator - TGB.tv Code of Conduct

Venom51

Posts: 568
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 7:12 pm
Location: Cumming,GA

HTPC Specs: Show details

#13

Post by Venom51 » Wed Aug 03, 2016 2:28 pm

Edited for correction...

I left it in the same VLAN. I didn't see a need as I'm only moving 10 megs per channel in each direction. Since DVBLink is limited to 8 clients that 80 megs of bidirectional traffic. We don't record on the clients so all the recording traffic stays on the DVBlink server.

The server that is serving the iSCSI targets has a 2 gig lag group so I was not worried about isolating it or jumbo packets.

Post Reply