WraithSpectres

Thank you for your help. I'll probably go with the Velociraptor.

Do you have any other site I could benchmark these two drives for further research?

Well I'm talking about an SSHD, not an SSD. And I have.

Thats the second question, is the Velociraptor actually faster than the SSHD?

The space doesn't matter to me, it is the reading of the HDD's. I am wondering which is better.

I already have an SSD (480GB) as my main drive. I am going to have a secondary HDD/SSHD.

The SSHD? Yes. Both brand new.

So I don't really know how to ask these, but I have a few questions. I am wanting the best reads for game loading times. I am debating on a 1TB 3.5" Firecuda or a 500GB Velociraptor. Yes I know Velociraptors are 6 years old (2012), but that means nothing to me (neither does the 500GB difference). Checking benchmarks, the Velociraptor has faster speeds of reading Sequentially and Randomly than the Firecuda. My worry is the HDD portion of the Firecuda, 8GB of the SSHD cache isn't going to hold an entire game these days. This primary benchmark >>here<< shows the the Velociraptor being faster, but I am unsure which is worth it for game loading times. I already own a Firecuda, but I am wondering if a Velociraptor would yield faster loading. I notice that not all my games on the Firecuda are utilizing the SSD cache ever after multiple boots of the game, there's simply too much to fit into 8GB of cache. So my questions/TL;DR: Talking about the Firecuda HDD portion, is it slower than a Velociraptor, and would this be the reason Velociraptor wins (apparently)? Does the Velociraptor having faster reads mean it will load a game faster? Which would you buy? The SSHD (with 8GB being the fast part) or the Velociraptor (with the entire drive being the fast part ((at least in reads)))?