SSHDs viable workhorse drives?

[Pkekyo]

Greetings, peoples of the internets.

I'm in the middle of a new build, and I'm planning to attach a NAS to it for remote mass storage.
The plan is using two 840 Pro SSDs in RAID0 for a system drive, but I still need some in-case storage space for raw footage when editing video footage and faff like that.
For the record, this is a rig that will be turned on 24/7, with a reboot every few weeks or so.

Would it have any purpose whatsoever to use an SSHD for this? If not, am I right in thinking a WD black would be the way to go for this purpose?
I've tried to do some research on my own, but noone seems to have had this exact question, and there's quite a bit of conflicting information about hybrid drives out there.

[MegaDave91]

Consumer grade drives aren't meant to run 24/7.  Go for the WD Red.

[Oshino Shinobu]

I think the SSHDs cache your most used programs for quicker launch times, so for something that is just used for storing footage, I don't think it will help. You'd be better off getting a hard drive and then using a SSD to cache. SSHDs have a pathetic 8GB flash cache I believe. 

[Ahnzh]

first off: SSHD use the cache for data that's accessed really often. That would be system data, Browser data but no raw footage. You would be accessing it from the HDD part of the drive.

 

 

Consumer grade drives aren't meant to run 24/7.  Go for the WD Red.

 

So NOT! RAW footage editing from a WD Red is ridiculous! Streaming, yeah, RAW Footage 1080p30 has like 120MB/s in playback. WD Reds have like 150MB/s. Especially when editing you don't use playback speeds but look for specific footage times, thus winding it back and forth and so excessing 120MB/s. You want something like a Seagate Constellation ES.3 with shorter access times/IOPS, higher throughput and possibly 2 of them in a RAID0/1. 2 TB drives cost around 150 dollars (Newegg). Reds are made for NAS purposes. He's gonna stress the drives. Reds won't be the right choice then

 

in addition to that, Reds are specialized on sequential reads. That might be a problem for certain workloads if you use them as your main workhorse

[Pkekyo]

[...]

So NOT! RAW footage editing from a WD Red is ridiculous! Streaming, yeah, RAW Footage 1080p30 has like 120MB/s in playback. WD Reds have like 150MB/s. Especially when editing you don't use playback speeds but look for specific footage times, thus winding it back and forth and so excessing 120MB/s. [...] He's gonna stress the drives. Reds won't be the right choice then

 

^ This.

Thanks for confirming my suspicions about SSHDs, Ahnzh.

Then it would seem I have to make the decision between a Seagate Constellation, WD Black or a VD VelociRaptor.

For this build I'm limited to two SSDs and a single HDD, so a RAID for the HDD is out of the question. At least I now I have three specific products to research and make an informed decision amongst them.

[Ahnzh]

actually the blacks might be even a better choice. VelociRaptors don't have enough space, Constellations are enterprise grade HHDs with stuff you will never need.

[IdeaStormer]

first off: SSHD use the cache for data that's accessed really often. That would be system data, Browser data but no raw footage. You would be accessing it from the HDD part of the drive.

 

 

 

So NOT! RAW footage editing from a WD Red is ridiculous! Streaming, yeah, RAW Footage 1080p30 has like 120MB/s in playback. WD Reds have like 150MB/s. Especially when editing you don't use playback speeds but look for specific footage times, thus winding it back and forth and so excessing 120MB/s. You want something like a Seagate Constellation ES.3 with shorter access times/IOPS, higher throughput and possibly 2 of them in a RAID0/1. 2 TB drives cost around 150 dollars (Newegg). Reds are made for NAS purposes. He's gonna stress the drives. Reds won't be the right choice then

 

Anyone recommending ES.3's is OK in my book   B)