SSHD vs SSD, noob with SSHD

[lithium_6]

I need some help choosing an additional hard drive for my desktop. It's for my game library and personal files.

 

I can get a Crucial SSD MX500 500GB or a Seagate Firecuda SSHD (st1000lx015) 1TB for the same price. I currently using around 300 to 400 GB in games and files, I was browsing for an SSD and the Firecuda popped up as an option on Amazon.

 

OS and other programs are running on my main NVME drive.

 

The Firecuda comes with 8GB of NAND but I have no idea of how much this will impact launch times. I do have a laptop with a second HDD and game loading times are painful. In this case with an SSHD I don't have a clue. In fact I had never used one.

[porina]

For this use case, a SSHD is going to perform practically the same as a low end HD. The flash part is far too small relative to the game file sizes so for all but the smallest of games, you'll be running native hard disk performance.

[lithium_6]

3 minutes ago, porina said:

For this use case, a SSHD is going to perform practically the same as a low end HD. The flash part is far too small relative to the game file sizes so for all but the smallest of games, you'll be running native hard disk performance.

Thanks, I was thinking exactly that. No point of having the cache if it isn't enough for whatever game I'm loading. Probably I'm going to wait a little more and see if can get a good deal on a 1TB SSD. 

[aisle9]

In my experience, an SSHD is a hard drive. You have zero control over what ends up placed on NAND, which means that when the drive's algorithm decides to put your recycle bin there, the whole purpose is defeated. I'd buy either a real SSD or a cheaper true HDD. Hybrids were a bad idea that sort of made sense back when SSDs were new and insanely expensive.