quantitative differences between SSD, SSHD, and 5400/7200 HDD drives

[jhencken]

Promoters of SSHD drives are always comparing the performance gains to 5400RPM HDDs. Anybody know if they're a lot better than 7200RPM HDDs?

Also, common wisdom is that SSDs outperform SSHDs, but I'd like to know how much faster they are, to see if the price difference is worth it.

 

[Archaic59]

Regardless of whether the performance is better or worse, IMO having all of it in one drive leads to disaster if only one component in it fails. I think it'd be safer to have an SSD for programs and a regular HD as backup storage. If you can only have a single drive the SSHD may be an option, but a large capacity SSD is even better. Just my 2 cents.

 

[alexoiu]

https/www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iBhf8rpobo or similar.

 

[geofelt]

Start from the worst:
5400rpm drives have slow latency . They are laptop drives which are optimized for power savings, not performance.

7200rpm drives spin faster with better latency and are better for the os.

SSHD drives, or hyprids may help, but they usually have so little ssd cache that they can rarely hold all that you usually need in the ssd part.
Then, performance is gated by the back end. Either 5400rom or 7200 rpm drives.
I see them as having a place if you need a big storage, like >1tb and are limited to only one drive like in a laptop.

A SSD is THE performance drive fot the OS. Any SSD is 50x faster than the fastest 10k hard drive in random I/O, and that is what the os does mostly.
It will be 2/3X faster than the fastest hard drive in sequential/
The ONLY negative to a SSD is the higher price per gb.