Large SSD or HDD and small SDD?
So I'm planning my build for october and checking out the prices of SSDS - they have come down a lot recently. The decision is:
Do i buy a 1TB SSD (samsung 850 EVO) £250
OR
Do I buy a 500GB SSD (samsung 850 EVO) £130 and a 2TB HDD at around £70
I don't have more than 500GB of data currently. is it worth just going for the biggest SSD i can afford - and get the OS and key games and prgrams on it and buy a HDD later on for non essential files?
There's no right or wrong answers to that, I'm afraid. A lot will depend on how you use you PC, what you use it for, and how much your data requirements might change.
If, for instance, your data needs may grow to the point where 1TB is insufficient, then you'll either need to go the SSD+HD route now, or add another SSD/HD when you hit that point. So if you go 1TB SSD now, can you afford to add storage when/if you need it? If not, get the HD option now. On the other hand, if you can easily afford to just to buy another SSD or HD if you need to, then worry about it then. Some people work on very tight budgets, while others can spend hundreds, or thousands, on little more than a whim.
Personally, I've long been of the view that while SSDs are undoubtedly faster, the cost/GB means that, if budgets are limited, it's a trade off between speed and capacity. Which way to go depends on how much you'll benefit from the speed, versus how important the capacity is ....and the size of your budget. And your choice on that may well be different to mine.
That said, the ever-decreasing margin between cost/GB of the two technologies is slowly making that less and less relevant.
I suspect most people here will tell you to get the SSD. My answer is to tell you to think carefully about YOUR budget, and YOUR needs, as opposed to wants. And decide from that. But even that much advice is only one person's opinion.
Saracen hit the nail on the head (obv)
If I was doing a new build now I would probably go for the latter option and take the SSD/HDD combo.
Just remember to move all non-essential files across to your storage drive (like your downloads file etc) in order to maximise the space on the SSD for your OS and programs.
Yeah, I think you guys are right - SSDs are dropping fast - so buying the largest capacity within reason whilst adding a HDD is probably best - I can always add more SSDs later when the prices drop - imagine £100 for 1TB - that would be sweet!
I would probably go for a large HD now and then buy an SSD next year or later and use your large HD for storage.Originally Posted by EvZ_2
SSD or SSD express ?
If you do decide to go for a HD, Ebuyer.com are selling a 2TB Seagate Barracuda for £54.99 today:
http://www.ebuyer.com/319641-seagate...ve-st2000dm001
Not much of a deal as they are £56.64 at Scan. Also eBuyer has quite a reputation for bad customer service and Seagate Barracuda have a high fail rate.
Three-year, 27,000 drive study
Millennium (29-09-2015)
1. Avoid Dem Seagate Drives
2. I would go 1TB SSD + 2x HDDs in RAID 1 for Backup - I had a 500gb SSD for a few months but kept having issues with running out of space with just applications installed.
...when (ab)used in a data-centre with a completely different workload than it was designed for.
The 1.5TB ones in that chart are specifically green ones designed to save power as much as possible. As you can imagine not the most appropriate choice of drive for a data centre.
In fact, you can see how misleading it is when you compare with the 3TB ones, which were actually problematic - assuming that's the 2011 models that were affected by the scramble to find components after the flooding in Thailand.
Which leaves the 4TB model, which performs exactly the same as the western digital ones.
haha if i could afford a 1tb ssd I'd be laughing
This is a pretty good infographic. Do you have a link to where you got it from?Not much of a deal as they are £56.64 at Scan. Also eBuyer has quite a reputation for bad customer service and Seagate Barracuda have a high fail rate.
Three-year, 27,000 drive study
May have helped me dodge a bullet. Thanks
I always follow a simple rule. SSD for operating system and apps/games and HDD for media. That way I get the best out of my budget. If you have mega budget then.SSD all they way.
Agree with the previous posts. SSD for OS & apps (inc.games if you need/have the space). For media files and archives NAS so in case of a machine failure your data will be accessible or least local drives in raid.
Take that infographic with a huge bucket of salt, or just search google for the articles explaining why Backblaze's data is hopelessly skewed.
Before you judge a man, walk a mile in his shoes; after that, who cares?! He's a mile away and you've got his shoes!
The data isn't the least bit skewed, it's just not the least bit applicable to regular users. Backblaze also made no quality judgements on the background of their data; they simply released it in raw form along with auxiliary data on numbers of drives and such. Whether or not that was a good thing is up for debate, given that most people just look at the pretty graphs and can't be bothered to read and understand the background conditions which resulted in said graphs.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
