SDD/HDD combo or just SSD?

[Isildur]

Should i get a HDD and a SDD, or should i just get a bigger SSD?

 

The idea about the HDD would be for storage, where i would download a lot of video that i might delete in a couple of hours.

As such, since there would be a lot of download and delete of videos, i thought it would be better to get a HDD for that as there isn't a lot of gain (if any) of having videos/photos/music on a SSD.

But since i keep reading that HDD are becoming obsolete, i'm in a dilemma of, either get a 1Tb SSD and a 2/3Tb HDD or get a 2/3Tb SSD.

Of course it also depends on the prices....

[cat milker]

I would get the ssd, because since hdd's are mechanical, there is a bigger chance of them failing. Also, not gonna make a huge difference but the ssd is faster for photos and music and stuff. 

[An0maly_76]

When I did my build, I got a 1TB SN570 M.2 for my primary storage, a 6TB WD Black HDD for aux storage, and I'm thinking about a 2 TB SSD or SSHD later on. M.2 is the way to go if you can do it. Just don't get caught up in the speed game. Anything over 3,500 mbps, you really can't tell the difference unless you're constantly reading / writing, and they run hotter than hammered hell to boot.

Edited May 29, 2022 by An0maly_76
Revised, more info

[Isildur]

1 hour ago, cat milker said:

I would get the ssd, because since hdd's are mechanical, there is a bigger chance of them failing.

I get that, but since there would a lot of download/delete, there is chance of the SSD starting to deteriorate at a faster pace.

For example, i have a current HDD (i think it's a Hitashi), bought in 2007 (15 years old), only 300Gb, works 21 hours (more of less) straight every single day (from 9am to 6am, more or less), is 98% full (rarely but it happens to only have less than 1Gb empty) and it still works.....fine(ish).

The OS takes like 2 minutes to open and stabilize, but....it works. And when i do some sort of test to see the health, it always say "good".

Maybe my HDD is a fluke....

 

38 minutes ago, An0maly_76 said:

Anything over 3,500 mbps, you really can't tell the difference unless you're constantly reading / writing, and they run hotter than hammered hell to boot.

That's something i was wondering.

Since the motherboard i'm going to get has 2 M.2 Gen 4, my idea was to take advantage of that, and they go higher than 3.500 mbps...but then there is the temps....

I would need to get a heatsink for the second one as the Asus Tuf B660 only has a heatsink on the first M.2

My idea would be to get a Gigabyte Aorus Gen4 500Gb (OS and some programs) and a Samsung 980 Pro 1Tb (games).

Both great bargains, 60€ and 158€, respectively.

And while we are it, a Toshiba P300 3TB HDD for everything else.

[BiotechBen]

I would say hybrid solution. small SSD for OS duty where latency matters, and then bulk storage on HDD where frequent read/write won't wear it out as quickly.

[An0maly_76]

24 minutes ago, Isildur said:

I get that, but since there would a lot of download/delete, there is chance of the SSD starting to deteriorate at a faster pace.

For example, i have a current HDD (i think it's a Hitashi), bought in 2007 (15 years old), only 300Gb, works 21 hours (more of less) straight every single day (from 9am to 6am, more or less), is 98% full (rarely but it happens to only have less than 1Gb empty) and it still works.....fine(ish).

The OS takes like 2 minutes to open and stabilize, but....it works. And when i do some sort of test to see the health, it always say "good".

Maybe my HDD is a fluke....

 

That's something i was wondering.

Since the motherboard i'm going to get has 2 M.2 Gen 4, my idea was to take advantage of that, and they go higher than 3.500 mbps...but then there is the temps....

I would need to get a heatsink for the second one as the Asus Tuf B660 only has a heatsink on the first M.2

My idea would be to get a Gigabyte Aorus Gen4 500Gb (OS and some programs) and a Samsung 980 Pro 1Tb (games).

Both great bargains, 60€ and 158€, respectively.

And while we are it, a Toshiba P300 3TB HDD for everything else.

The trouble is, there really isn't a lot out there to take advantage of PCIe4.0 just yet. Same for DDR5. People talk about AM4 being a dead-end platform when it still has three or four processors that don't even breathe hard under current gaming use.

To me, AM5 is a joke. AMD is bragging about 5.5 Ghz and some of us are getting that out of pre-AM4 platforms.

 

I'm all about bang for the buck. Sure, I ordered an SN850 for my 5900X rig. But when I started seeing how negligible the difference really was, I started wondering where that other $150-$185 went. And I exchanged it for an SN570 real quick. I might eventually get an SN770, but I just don't see the point until the market and software catches up to PCIe4.

 

To illustrate, for $2,500 I got:

 

$621 - R9 5900X

$160 - Asus TUF B550M-PLUS

$130 - Corsair 4000X case

$137 - Corsair RM850x PSU

$850 - Asus KO-RTX3060ti-8GB-OC

$  98 - WD Blue SN570 1TB M.2

$169 - WD Black 6TB HDD

$128 - 2x16 Crucial Ballistix DDR4-3200

$  95 - Corsair LL120 x3

$  50 - Corsair iCUE Commander

 

I spent another $200 or so on Amazon protection plans, and my system is warranted for four years.

 

When I got this stuff 3-4 months ago, 3070s were $1000, 3080s were $1500, and 3090s were $2000. I was not about to pay double or triple for another 70-100 fps when it wasn't necessary for what I do. My system screams just with PBO enabled, and I'm thinking about opening my RAM up to 1.5V and 3800Mhz.

 

Point is, if I had really gone for the gusto, my build would have been $5000 easy. And I just can't see putting that much money into a computer. I had kids throwing shade at my build saying tthat RGB and liquid cooling was the most important part of a PC build. My 5900X is the equivalent of that redneck with the rusty Pinto with a 429 under the hood that leaves everyone else in the dust and has less than $3,000 in the car, outrunning $70,000 factory muscle cars.

 

Is there faster? Sure, there always will be. But at the end of the day, you gotta build what works for you. And you'll always be better off doing your research and making sure your components are as well-matched as possible, and putting that and speed over all the bling.

[BionicSeaSerpent]

4 hours ago, Isildur said:

Should i get a HDD and a SDD, or should i just get a bigger SSD?

 

The idea about the HDD would be for storage, where i would download a lot of video that i might delete in a couple of hours.

As such, since there would be a lot of download and delete of videos, i thought it would be better to get a HDD for that as there isn't a lot of gain (if any) of having videos/photos/music on a SSD.

But since i keep reading that HDD are becoming obsolete, i'm in a dilemma of, either get a 1Tb SSD and a 2/3Tb HDD or get a 2/3Tb SSD.

Of course it also depends on the prices....

just Get two SSDs. Prices are not super expensive compared to a HDD anyways. plus, buying any HDD is really a gamble on if its a Lemon or not.  most likely its fine but there are times that HDDs die super early with only a few thousand hours of use. a hard drive is really slow compared to an SSD too. if you're going to use it to move and download Data pretty often, you want the Speed of an SSD. a Hard drive will be just "Good Enough" to do it. another upside is that if you need to move your system for whatever reason, you don't need to worry about the Hard drive Destroying itself or being damaged because there is only SSD Storage.

[wseaton]

Standard HDs are not less reliable than SSDs. Failure rates are about the same. Data center grade SSDs on the other hand are tougher than both.

 

I still like a hybrid approach. A big spinner can hold a lot of back ups.

[Isildur]

13 hours ago, An0maly_76 said:

'm all about bang for the buck. Sure, I ordered an SN850 for my 5900X rig. But when I started seeing how negligible the difference really was, I started wondering where that other $150-$185 went. And I exchanged it for an SN570 real quick. I might eventually get an SN770, but I just don't see the point until the market and software catches up to PCIe4

(...)

s there faster? Sure, there always will be. But at the end of the day, you gotta build what works for you. And you'll always be better off doing your research and making sure your components are as well-matched as possible, and putting that and speed over all the bling.

I understand completely, and you are right...but the price difference says otherwise at first glance.

For example, like i said i can get a Samsung 980 PRO 1Tb for 158€ (that's a 80€ different from normal price).

A Samsung 870 Evo 1Tb SATA III is 140€, that's a very low difference of 18€ for a such difference in capacity.

 

Even so, i might go with a Kioxia Exceria Plus 1Tb, it's just 90€ and the reviews are very good.

[An0maly_76]

30 minutes ago, Isildur said:

I understand completely, and you are right...but the price difference says otherwise at first glance.

For example, like i said i can get a Samsung 980 PRO 1Tb for 158€ (that's a 80€ different from normal price).

A Samsung 870 Evo 1Tb SATA III is 140€, that's a very low difference of 18€ for a such difference in capacity.

 

Even so, i might go with a Kioxia Exceria Plus 1Tb, it's just 90€ and the reviews are very good.

1.074 USD to 1 Euro - $169.06 USD for that Samsung 980. And I can get a 1TB SN570 for $89.10 through Amazon Prime right now. I think geographical location has some factors here. Shipping always changes pricing.