I've been wondering what advantages SSD has over a hard drive I know they are faster, but does that mean that they download faster or what?
Everything feels faster, basically. Not only does the SSD transfer faster than a hard drive, the latency is much much less. In other words the SSD response more or less right away, while the hard disk is busy seeking and waiting for the disk to spin 'round to the right place etc etc. Boot times are faster, games and programs load faster, almost everything that touches storage is a little snappier.
Close to 3 years ago, I replaced the hard disk in my wife's 2009 iMac with an SSD, hoping to get another year out of the machine. It was like getting a whole new machine, and we probably won't bother replacing the computer until next year sometime
thnx this helped a lot
what about hybrids?
Hybrids are as fast as SSD, except when they are only as fast as hard drives. The problem is that it's extremely difficult to predict when a hybrid will go at SSD speed and when it won't. With 500 GB SSD's starting at just over $50 now, I have trouble seeing the case for a hybrid unless you absolutely must save every penny yet need a terabyte or more of storage.
So in my build should I have a 500 gb ssd and a 2tb hdd, or should I have one 2tb hybrid?
How much storage do you think you'll need? 1 TB or under I'd just get an SSD. If you really think you'll need at least 2 TB then it depends on how much you're willing to organize things by hand, so that active stuff is on the SSD, vs how much a surprise slowdown will annoy you. If you don't mind tracking stuff by hand get the SSD/HDD combination. If you can't be bothered, either get the hybrid, or consider the SSD/HDD with some tiering software such as StoreMI (for intel it's sold by under another name, can't think of it now but google will find it). StoreMI in effect turns your SSD/HDD combo into a hybrid, except that you have control over the size of SSD you get as opposed to be stuck with whatever sized SSD is in the hybrid drive.
I want at least 1TB because I play a LOT of different games and I currently use a 500gb Xbox so I can tell just about how much games that fits. I don't really want to sort the stuff manually because that seems annoying.
I've been impressed with the idea of AMD's (actually licensed by a third party) StoreMI. The idea is that you take a portion (up to 250GB of the SSD in the one included on some AMD motherboards, but other upgrades are available) of your SSD and add it to your HDD storage. Since hybrids tend to have about 4GB of cache at most, this tends to be "enough" storage most of the time.
(there's a bunch of programs that do this, although I really can't be sure they are as absolutely bug-free as you'd want such programs to be. Also expect that you could probably just buy "enough" storage for the price of the software (unless you have the right AMD chipset on your AMD motherboard).
Personally, I tend to move things around on drives myself but eventually expect to foist this on my father (who is a data packrat but typically dumps everything on the Desktop).
So if you tend to store more than 500GB of data and you don't want to manually move things around, this is probably a good system.
Note that if you do go with a rotating drive (preferably IN ADDITION to some sort of SSD), I'd recommend just going straight to 3TB (or more). The price/TB falls pretty dramatically up to that point, then is pretty flat.
The size of the SSD isn't nearly as clear, but 500GB seems to be the "sweetspot" right now. Going smaller probably won't hurt you too much (as you could just dump more and more stuff onto the HDD, while going to small on the HDD means deleting stuff), but certainly can be annoying (and just the whole StoreMI/tiering system was born).
Ssd's also have technically a longer life span since they don't have moving parts like hdd and they don't make any noise.
Replacing an hdd for an ssd is one of the biggest upgrades you can do.
Well, there are pros & cons for each & everything. However, upgrading your system from traditional HDD to the latest modern SSD is one of the best things. Here, I suggest you to check out this below blog by Stellar Data Recovery for more information about the SSD’s: https://www.stellarinfo.com/blog/solid-state-drives-facts/
Hope this will help.
I just put a SSD in an old Dell SFF with a Pentium D dual core of some kind. It was getting pretty slow just to load a full browser page say off a news site with heavy content. Now it has it all in a few seconds. When you start a program it comes up much faster, it really almost is a new computer compared to before. And this is only SATA II. Of course now I found out I can fit a core 2 quad in it so I found one of those on epay for $16 lol, which has a much higher rating for CPU scores. This PC is just for browsing, shopping, documents, etc, it should add a few years to it and hey, it wont be in the landfill either. You can also have your swap file on there and it is much faster if you run short of memory. This boots in less than half the time. It is really an amazing upgrade for this machine. On the other hand another old PC here has a 5400 rpm 1tb HDD and has a lot of photos and video on it, and it is not slow accessing them for viewing. So for storage use HDD still seems to work fine for me. For a new PC you can at least get a smaller SSD for the OS at low cost, it makes little sense not to. The HDD is by far the slowest part of a PC now. I have a fast M.2 SSD for my new build, should have all the parts soon.
wow, are m.2's just even faster versions off ssd's or something?
The Nvme drives are faster, they can actually raid the SSD chips in the drive, and SSD is improving with better controllers and chips and now can be faster than sata 3. But your MotherBoard must support Nvme in the chipset. So there are Nvme and PCI drives that are M.2 connector and you need to know what you have in your MB and what drive you are buying. The Nvme is faster than the Pcie ones, it is a special Pcie protocol only newer MoBo will have.
Sata 3 is 6gb/sec and Pcie M.2 is about 4 times faster, while Pcie with Nvme M.2 (or U.2) is about 6 times faster than sata 3. This I read it should be correct for read speeds, write is a little less. Please correct me if needed.
In comparison a 7200rpm HDD is about 150MB/sec (mega byte, not giga BIT) some fast HDD can hit 200mb/sec. Sata I is 1.5 Gb/s = 0.1875 GB/s= 187.5 MB/s. So a very fast HDD maybe 10,000 rpm can max out a Sata 1 controller. Sata 2 is 3gb/sec and sata 3 any somewhat new PC has is 6gb/sec. Of course a drive may never see maximum theoretical rates in actual testing, but gives a person an idea of how they compare.
Even in the nice asus prime pro MB I plan to get one M.2 is Nvme and the second M.2 is just pcie, so I have to be careful what M2 drive I would use in it. But likely I will use the faster Nvme M.2 for OS and just a normal Sata for storage purposes. I can change it later. I read they are actually waiting for the next new Pcie standard to come out with more lanes, because running drives and video/etc off the pcie is filling it up.