Seagate ssdhd vs Wd black

[chachee99]

I need a new hard drive and I saw these two for sale for the same price. This will be my main hard drive. I use my pc mostly for games and Internet. I would get a ssd but with games being 50 or more gb downloads it would fill up quickly.

Which HD is the better choice?

I want to get a 2tb in size.

 

[McDuncun]

Dude the WD Black is a 2.5" mobile drive but will work just fine, both are good... I`m just a Seagate fan so I`ll go with that, but there is no real wrong answer here...

SSHD`s are a very good buy these days, don`t see why you would want to buy HDD`s anymore for personal use...

 

[chachee99]

I thought the wd black was both 2.5 and 3.5.

Ssd drives are tempting but the size is too small.

 

[Alpha3031]

WD blacks also come in 3.5" variants. @OP you could get the WD Blue or Segate Barracuda, which is usually much cheaper and a small (32 GB ish) SSD cache. Otherwise, I'd just go with the Black. The small 8 GB flash cache is likely not going to be much use (it wouldn't even hold your OS.)

 

[i7Baby]

A SSHD is a bit slower than a SSD. And a fair bit quicker than a HDD. Especially if you keep loading the same programs again and again.

 

[Alpha3031]

There wouldn't be much real life difference between the two drives, but the HDD would be more consistent, but the SSHD would be faster at the frequently used programs.

 

[chachee99]

I usually leave my pc on most of the time and allow it to go into sleep mode so boot speed is not a big deal for me. Having more than enough space is more of a priority.

 

[Alpha3031]

I usually leave my pc on most of the time and allow it to go into sleep mode so boot speed is not a big deal for me. Having more than enough space is more of a priority.

Well, both have the same amount of space, so there's no need to worry.

 

[laviniuc]

they are nothing alike.
-the wd black is ssd+hdd in one hdd enclosure. (so if you lack space - say one drive only laptops this gives you both a ssd - 120gb and a hdd 500 i think it was)
-the seagate uses the 8gb of flash as invisible cache without giving you access to it in any way. performance is somewhere in the middle hdd versus ssd. it's not a bad option and if you're not used to having/using multiple partitions this is for you.
-normal ssd + normal hdd is same as the wd black BUT less expensive and you need to have extra room (desktop or large 17" laptops) to place 2 pieces of storage.

 

[chachee99]

My most frequently used programs are chrome and steam. Occasionally I will use office. I am thinking of doing some video editing for a you tube channel. Would the speed make a difference in a sshd? I know that the wd black is also a rock solid drive based on reviews and user testimonials. I cannot say the same about the Seagate ssdhd.

 

[McDuncun]

WD blacks also come in 3.5" variants. @OP you could get the WD Blue or Segate Barracuda, which is usually much cheaper and a small (32 GB ish) SSD cache. Otherwise, I'd just go with the Black. The small 8 GB flash cache is likely not going to be much use (it wouldn't even hold your OS.)

Maybe I`m understanding you wrong... Do you want to load the OS on the cache memory on the SSHD??

 

[Alpha3031]

WD blacks also come in 3.5" variants. @OP you could get the WD Blue or Segate Barracuda, which is usually much cheaper and a small (32 GB ish) SSD cache. Otherwise, I'd just go with the Black. The small 8 GB flash cache is likely not going to be much use (it wouldn't even hold your OS.)

Maybe I`m understanding you wrong... Do you want to load the OS on the cache memory on the SSHD??

I'm not OP. Just stating that that's what would happen (OS incompletely loaded on cache) if OP restarts often.

 

[McDuncun]

WD blacks also come in 3.5" variants. @OP you could get the WD Blue or Segate Barracuda, which is usually much cheaper and a small (32 GB ish) SSD cache. Otherwise, I'd just go with the Black. The small 8 GB flash cache is likely not going to be much use (it wouldn't even hold your OS.)

Maybe I`m understanding you wrong... Do you want to load the OS on the cache memory on the SSHD??

I'm not OP. Just stating that that's what would happen (OS incompletely loaded on cache) if OP restarts often.

Dude nothing ever gets completely loaded on any cache memory, it`s passed on before it gets filled up?

 

[Alpha3031]

Dude nothing ever gets completely loaded on any cache memory, it`s passed on before it gets filled up?

I'll quickly describe how a cache (of the write through type) works. When your computer wants something, it looks in the cache. If it isn't there, it finds it in the not-cache and puts it in the cache. Now it's completely in the cache. If there isn't enough space, the computer kicks stuff out, and if there still isn't enough space, the computer just loads part of the file, and next time, the computer has to load the files at the speed of the slowest part, the one not in the cache.

 

[McDuncun]

Dude nothing ever gets completely loaded on any cache memory, it`s passed on before it gets filled up?

I'll quickly describe how a cache (of the write through type) works. When your computer wants something, it looks in the cache. If it isn't there, it finds it in the not-cache and puts it in the cache. Now it's completely in the cache. If there isn't enough space, the computer kicks stuff out, and if there still isn't enough space, the computer just loads part of the file, and next time, the computer has to load the files at the speed of the slowest part, the one not in the cache.

Dude I have no idea why I put a question mark at the end of that! I know what cache is, no what I thought was you said you want to actually load an operating system on the cache memory of an SSHD....

That sounded so ludacris I checked and rechecked myself for any brain or eye tumors...

 

[chachee99]

they are nothing alike.
-the wd black is ssd+hdd in one hdd enclosure. (so if you lack space - say one drive only laptops this gives you both a ssd - 120gb and a hdd 500 i think it was)
-the seagate uses the 8gb of flash as invisible cache without giving you access to it in any way. performance is somewhere in the middle hdd versus ssd. it's not a bad option and if you're not used to having/using multiple partitions this is for you.
-normal ssd + normal hdd is same as the wd black BUT less expensive and you need to have extra room (desktop or large 17" laptops) to place 2 pieces of storage.

That is for the wd black2 which is really expensive.

 

[laviniuc]

they are nothing alike.
-the wd black is ssd+hdd in one hdd enclosure. (so if you lack space - say one drive only laptops this gives you both a ssd - 120gb and a hdd 500 i think it was)
-the seagate uses the 8gb of flash as invisible cache without giving you access to it in any way. performance is somewhere in the middle hdd versus ssd. it's not a bad option and if you're not used to having/using multiple partitions this is for you.
-normal ssd + normal hdd is same as the wd black BUT less expensive and you need to have extra room (desktop or large 17" laptops) to place 2 pieces of storage.

That is for the wd black2 which is really expensive.

i thought that's what you mean, wd black (normal hdd is just a bit faster compared to a normal hdd)