SilverStone Device Gives 70% HDD Boost

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't really see the point. It's the same thing as having a really large cache on a hard drive. You have to pay $50 for this device, plus buy an SSD. You'd be better off just having a separate SSD for boot and a good ole mechanical drive for storage.
 
Yep, seems only a valid option if you *really* don't want to reinstall the OS.
Otherwise, as mentioned in the article, use the ssd directly.
And what would be the $ and performance comparison if you just added a new drive and run on Raid0 (most motherboards have on-board Raid0)
 
I don't really understand... why 2 satas ports ?
This is backup propose or performance propose ?

I feel like more cache memory on HD cache could give same or better result...
 
It seems they're only catering to the market of people who REALLY don't want to reinstall their OS... doesn't make sense to me. IMO, the reinstallation of the OS is one of the benefits of going through an HDD/SDD upgrade. For those people who don't reinstall on a somewhat regular basis, the process of going back to a unmodified OS and putting on just the essentials can be as much of a boost in performance as this new piece of technology claims to achieve anyway.
 
I appreciate the idea, if it worked as advertised. If only the OS ran quicker, then yes, have a boot drive and storage drive. But if it actually helps the storage drive load 70% faster on everything, then that's great, and keeps the SSD alive longer.
 
[citation][nom]scryer_360[/nom]...So its what RAM is supposed to be....[/citation]Oh, you have hundreds of gigs of non-volative RAM? What kind, ferro mem, or one of those other unreleased technologies? Or maybe you have 10 battery-backed RAM drives installed and hooked to a big UPS?
 
[citation][nom]amabhy[/nom]WTF is an SDD?Come on guys, its not hard to skim an article half a page long.[/citation]

Very true. The writing as a whole is sloppy. For example:
"the device itself is mounted within a 3.5-inch drive bay which in turn houses an SSD."

It sounds like Mr. Parrish is saying that the 3.5" drive bay houses both the device AND an SSD (If this were true, I would say, "Congratulations on making the device compact. But wouldn't it look kind of messy?"). I think what he was trying to say was this:

"The device, which houses an SSD, is mounted within a 3.5-inch drive bay."
 
So does anyone else remember that Samsung tried this awhile ago with their Hybrid Drive technology? No? Guess that shows how well it worked out the first time around.

Like hybrid cars, its a good idea on paper, but the required time and effort to perfect the technology should really be used to come up with a replacement for magnetic media, not a complicated go-between.
 
if you can get some cheap 16 or 32 gig ssd's and slap it on and hdd with a cheaper hybrid drive then this would be great for high storage, not booting.
 
Sounds like this device acts like a semi permanent cache. If it can store files that are read alot on it, it would be a winner, but not for 50$. So, the OS files that are read the most often, the game that you launch most often, would be stored on this device seamlessly. Next time you boot, it's still there (unlike a RAM substitute) and you'll boot up quickly and launch your game quickly, everytime.

A true RAM cache or HDD cache doesn't work this way as it still has to read it off the HDD every time to store it in the cache for use.
 
A ton of nay-sayers but they're missing the point of the product, give performance boost to your existing setup, no need to purchase a new HD and copy the thing. As far as I can tell the SSD is already built in (but it never mentions the density, 1GB, 2GB, 4GB???). The USB connector is used for firmware updates, it's NOT for plugging in a thumbdrive SSD.

I'm excited to see real world benchmarks of the device in action to see what kind of speed it offers, I never trust 1st party claims.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.