Posted: 5/30/2012 11:46:12 AM EDT
|
So teach me about SRT. My understanding is it combines a normal large capacity HDD with a small capacity SDD to increase performance. The idea being the SSD is used for caching commonly accessed data due to its faster read speeds while the standard HDD is used for the OS and less commonly needed cache files. My question is, does it really work? Are there down sides? Say I'm building a system with a 1TB 7200rpm HDD and I could add a 30GB SSD for SRT for roughly $60. Would it be worth it? My goal is to build a decent (mid-road) gaming PC while adding budget priced upgrades to increase performance where I'm able. |
|
You mean like a hybrid drive?
If I was building a gaming rig I would go with a SSD for the OS and apps, then 2nd/slave SATA drive for media files (or an external USB or NAS drive). You want to get the performance of the SSD for loading the OS and the apps. Unless you're rocking 10gb+ image files or editing movies, the files will probably load ok from a 7200 secondary disk. Max out your possible RAM. |
|
eta: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_Response_Technology Why not just use a 32Gb SD card? eta2: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReadyBoost |
|
It's sort of like a hybrid dive, I guess. It's two actual drive, but the computer only "sees" one drive. It only uses the SSD for file caching, if I understand it correctly. I'm seeing figures like 60%+ increase in performance regarding read/write speeds, but I don't know if that's accurate. |
|
Quoted:
It's sort of like a hybrid dive, I guess. It's two actual drive, but the computer only "sees" one drive. It only uses the SSD for file caching, if I understand it correctly. I'm seeing figures like 60%+ increase in performance regarding read/write speeds, but I don't know if that's accurate. I don't have any experience with it on a consumer side but I'd recommend if you can afford it just get a SSD for the OS and all programs. The cost savings probably won't be worth the headache you'll have later. ETA: You can get 120GB SSD for $100 off newegg. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: It's sort of like a hybrid dive, I guess. It's two actual drive, but the computer only "sees" one drive. It only uses the SSD for file caching, if I understand it correctly. I'm seeing figures like 60%+ increase in performance regarding read/write speeds, but I don't know if that's accurate. I don't have any experience with it on a consumer side but I'd recommend if you can afford it just get a SSD for the OS and all programs. The cost savings probably won't be worth the headache you'll have later. You could do that, and use ReadyBoost for up to 256GB of cache. |
|
It's clear to me that a lot of the people who responded have no idea what they are talking about.
It essentially works as a large cache for the spindle drive. With proper hardware/software, the computer will begin to recognize what is being opened the most and it will automatically put those files onto the SSD for quicker access. Does it work? Yes. Will you see the same performance as simply having a large SSD? No, however it is a substantial improvement from just having a spindle drive. My recommendations, Get a 120GB SSD and a 750GB 7200rpm drive. Use the 120GB SSD for the OS and the main apps that you use. Then use the Spindle drive for everything else. FAQ: Can you install programs on either drive with Windows 7? Yes |
|
Quoted: Yeah, that's why I'm asking. If SRT isn't something commonly being used I'll just forget about that and stick with a standard HDD.Quoted: It's sort of like a hybrid dive, I guess. It's two actual drive, but the computer only "sees" one drive. It only uses the SSD for file caching, if I understand it correctly. I'm seeing figures like 60%+ increase in performance regarding read/write speeds, but I don't know if that's accurate. I don't have any experience with it on a consumer side but I'd recommend if you can afford it just get a SSD for the OS and all programs. The cost savings probably won't be worth the headache you'll have later. I just wanted to look into SRT because it seemed like a good boost for small amount of cash. The 'too good to be true' kind of upgrade. But since I've been out of PC building for quite a while I thought it would be worth looking into. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's sort of like a hybrid dive, I guess. It's two actual drive, but the computer only "sees" one drive. It only uses the SSD for file caching, if I understand it correctly. I'm seeing figures like 60%+ increase in performance regarding read/write speeds, but I don't know if that's accurate. I don't have any experience with it on a consumer side but I'd recommend if you can afford it just get a SSD for the OS and all programs. The cost savings probably won't be worth the headache you'll have later. You could do that, and use ReadyBoost for up to 256GB of cache. Ready boost is something that Lenovo uses. Like I said, it works, but the performance is lacking in comparison to a normal SSD setup. |
|
Quoted: It's clear to me that a lot of the people who responded have no idea what they are talking about. It essentially works as a large cache for the spindle drive. With proper hardware/software, the computer will begin to recognize what is being opened the most and it will automatically put those files onto the SSD for quicker access. Does it work? Yes. Will you see the same performance as simply having a large SSD? No, however it is a substantial improvement from just having a spindle drive. My recommendations, Get a 120GB SSD and a 750GB 7200rpm drive. Use the 120GB SSD for the OS and the main apps that you use. Then use the Spindle drive for everything else. FAQ: Can you install programs on either drive with Windows 7? Yes That's really the way to go for best results. Still, using the ReadyBoost in conjunction should still work. It's something I've been meaning to play with but it's still on the back burner. 32GB of suitable flash media is only 20ish bucks so it's no big deal to test it out. If you find it isn't worthwhile, all you do is just unplug the flash reader.  |
|
Quoted: So teach me about SRT. My understanding is it combines a normal large capacity HDD with a small capacity SDD to increase performance. The idea being the SSD is used for caching commonly accessed data due to its faster read speeds while the standard HDD is used for the OS and less commonly needed cache files. My question is, does it really work? Are there down sides? Say I'm building a system with a 1TB 7200rpm HDD and I could add a 30GB SSD for SRT for roughly $60. Would it be worth it? My goal is to build a decent (mid-road) gaming PC while adding budget priced upgrades to increase performance where I'm able. FYI, this came across my Email this morning. http://www.logicbuy.com/deals/ocz-agility-3-120gb-sata-3-ssd/31953.aspx 60GB SSD for $59.99 |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yeah, that's why I'm asking. If SRT isn't something commonly being used I'll just forget about that and stick with a standard HDD.
Quoted:
It's sort of like a hybrid dive, I guess. It's two actual drive, but the computer only "sees" one drive. It only uses the SSD for file caching, if I understand it correctly. I'm seeing figures like 60%+ increase in performance regarding read/write speeds, but I don't know if that's accurate. I don't have any experience with it on a consumer side but I'd recommend if you can afford it just get a SSD for the OS and all programs. The cost savings probably won't be worth the headache you'll have later. I just wanted to look into SRT because it seemed like a good boost for small amount of cash. The 'too good to be true' kind of upgrade. But since I've been out of PC building for quite a while I thought it would be worth looking into. From what I just looked up, it's proprietary to Intel so I'm not sure if it requires Intel SSDs or not and it's limited to 64GB. For the cost of of a 120GB drive I'd probably just go that route although it sounds like an interesting technology and I'd be curious where it goes in the future. I have an 80GB SSD in my work PC with a 1TB drive for data. I'd highly recommend going 120GB or more. I only have 13GB free currently with the OS and apps I have installed. I don't have any data on it and have concerns of possibly having to uninstall something later. |
|
Quoted: Hmm, that's a pretty good idea. That only adds about $60 more than I was looking at already.It's clear to me that a lot of the people who responded have no idea what they are talking about. It essentially works as a large cache for the spindle drive. With proper hardware/software, the computer will begin to recognize what is being opened the most and it will automatically put those files onto the SSD for quicker access. Does it work? Yes. Will you see the same performance as simply having a large SSD? No, however it is a substantial improvement from just having a spindle drive. My recommendations, Get a 120GB SSD and a 750GB 7200rpm drive. Use the 120GB SSD for the OS and the main apps that you use. Then use the Spindle drive for everything else. FAQ: Can you install programs on either drive with Windows 7? Yes |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yeah, that's why I'm asking. If SRT isn't something commonly being used I'll just forget about that and stick with a standard HDD.
Quoted:
It's sort of like a hybrid dive, I guess. It's two actual drive, but the computer only "sees" one drive. It only uses the SSD for file caching, if I understand it correctly. I'm seeing figures like 60%+ increase in performance regarding read/write speeds, but I don't know if that's accurate. I don't have any experience with it on a consumer side but I'd recommend if you can afford it just get a SSD for the OS and all programs. The cost savings probably won't be worth the headache you'll have later. I just wanted to look into SRT because it seemed like a good boost for small amount of cash. The 'too good to be true' kind of upgrade. But since I've been out of PC building for quite a while I thought it would be worth looking into. From what I just looked up, it's proprietary to Intel so I'm not sure if it requires Intel SSDs or not and it's limited to 64GB. For the cost of of a 120GB drive I'd probably just go that route although it sounds like an interesting technology and I'd be curious where it goes in the future. I have an 80GB SSD in my work PC with a 1TB drive for data. I'd highly recommend going 120GB or more. I only have 13GB free currently with the OS and apps I have installed. I don't have any data on it and have concerns of possibly having to uninstall something later. Segate uses this tech all built into a single HD. There isn't a need to buy two of them, if this is really the rout that you want to go. Segate Momentus XT |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Hmm, that's a pretty good idea. That only adds about $60 more than I was looking at already.
It's clear to me that a lot of the people who responded have no idea what they are talking about. It essentially works as a large cache for the spindle drive. With proper hardware/software, the computer will begin to recognize what is being opened the most and it will automatically put those files onto the SSD for quicker access. Does it work? Yes. Will you see the same performance as simply having a large SSD? No, however it is a substantial improvement from just having a spindle drive. My recommendations, Get a 120GB SSD and a 750GB 7200rpm drive. Use the 120GB SSD for the OS and the main apps that you use. Then use the Spindle drive for everything else. FAQ: Can you install programs on either drive with Windows 7? Yes If it's speed that your looking for, it's the only / best way to go. Technically you can go with a smaller SSD if money is an issue. 40GB would be the smallest that I would go. Keep in mind that after installing Windows 7, you will only be left with around 15GB of free space on your C Drive. 120GB or larger is Ideal though. Also, in case you haven't noticed....the larger the capacity of the SSD, the faster they tend to be. Don't believe me, check out the stats. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yeah, that's why I'm asking. If SRT isn't something commonly being used I'll just forget about that and stick with a standard HDD.
Quoted:
It's sort of like a hybrid dive, I guess. It's two actual drive, but the computer only "sees" one drive. It only uses the SSD for file caching, if I understand it correctly. I'm seeing figures like 60%+ increase in performance regarding read/write speeds, but I don't know if that's accurate. I don't have any experience with it on a consumer side but I'd recommend if you can afford it just get a SSD for the OS and all programs. The cost savings probably won't be worth the headache you'll have later. I just wanted to look into SRT because it seemed like a good boost for small amount of cash. The 'too good to be true' kind of upgrade. But since I've been out of PC building for quite a while I thought it would be worth looking into. I have not tried what you are talking about, nor have I had an SSD yet. My most recent build I used a WD VelociRaptor 450G for OS and apps and then a bare bones WD 1.5T for data storage. I wish I could tell you more about SRT but have not really looked into it at all. I will say if you decide to go just one HDD then velociraptor is a good option. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Hmm, that's a pretty good idea. That only adds about $60 more than I was looking at already.It's clear to me that a lot of the people who responded have no idea what they are talking about. It essentially works as a large cache for the spindle drive. With proper hardware/software, the computer will begin to recognize what is being opened the most and it will automatically put those files onto the SSD for quicker access. Does it work? Yes. Will you see the same performance as simply having a large SSD? No, however it is a substantial improvement from just having a spindle drive. My recommendations, Get a 120GB SSD and a 750GB 7200rpm drive. Use the 120GB SSD for the OS and the main apps that you use. Then use the Spindle drive for everything else. FAQ: Can you install programs on either drive with Windows 7? Yes If it's speed that your looking for, it's the only / best way to go. Technically you can go with a smaller SSD if money is an issue. 40GB would be the smallest that I would go. Keep in mind that after installing Windows 7, you will only be left with around 15GB of free space on your C Drive. 120GB or larger is Ideal though. Also, in case you haven't noticed....the larger the capacity of the SSD, the faster they tend to be. Don't believe me, check out the stats. Yeah, I think I'll go with the 120GB SSD with a 7200rpm spindle drive for data storage. The SRT is a pretty interesting concept but I don't like being the guinea pig for new tech. I thought maybe this was something being more commonly used by now. Clearly the price difference isn't enough for widespread adoption. |
|
Quoted: If going this route make sure you get the proper mobo chipset that is capable of ssd caching. Ive read some articles on It and says it works fairly well. Especially If you are accessing the same data over and over again! Yep, I'll probably use the Z77 mobo chipset which should be able to use it. Supposedly SRT gets faster as it learns what you use more often. |
|
Quoted:
It's clear to me that a lot of the people who responded have no idea what they are talking about. It essentially works as a large cache for the spindle drive. With proper hardware/software, the computer will begin to recognize what is being opened the most and it will automatically put those files onto the SSD for quicker access. Does it work? Yes. Will you see the same performance as simply having a large SSD? No, however it is a substantial improvement from just having a spindle drive. My recommendations, Get a 120GB SSD and a 750GB 7200rpm drive. Use the 120GB SSD for the OS and the main apps that you use. Then use the Spindle drive for everything else. FAQ: Can you install programs on either drive with Windows 7? Yes This Is how I have my home comp setup. 64gig ssd boot drive and a spin drive for everything else. Works nicely |