Windows 7 Forums

Welcome to Windows 7 Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find support and solutions for any problems regarding your Windows 7 PC be it Dell, HP, Acer, Asus or a custom build. We also provide an extensive Windows 7 tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks.


Windows 7: SSHD - Performance comparison with HDD and SSD

23 Dec 2013   #11
whs
Microsoft MVP

Vista, Windows7, Mint Mate, Zorin, Windows 8
 
 

Your experience confirms the caching nature of the SSD part. It essentially works like the caching of Superfetch in RAM. Once you used a function/program and it has found a place in the cache, the SSD speed applies. But stuff that is used for the first time has to be first found and cached from the HDD.

I paid 90 odd Dollars for the 1TB model.


My System SpecsSystem Spec
.
24 Dec 2013   #12
Britton30
Microsoft MVP

Windows 7 Ultimate X64 SP1
 
 

I used a 750GB Seagate MomentusXT SSHD with an 8Gb SSD cache as the data drive where I have the OS on a 128GB Crucial M4 SSD. I didn't keep any detailed stats on the set up. I ran it for a few days but I could tell no difference in app loading, accessing data, saving data.

After about a week I run AS SSD on the SSHD and it scored considerably lower than the HDD I had been using, Seagate Momentus. (Both are 2.5" drives)

My conclusion is that a SSHD would likely do much better as an OS drive than for a data drive. There's not much of the same data accessed on the data drive so the SSHD controller I suspect would be swapping data in and out all the time. An OS on the other hand re-uses data often, e.g. boot files, browsers, email and so on.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
24 Dec 2013   #13
Lady Fitzgerald

Win 7 Ultimate 64 bit
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Britton30 View Post
I used a 750GB Seagate MomentusXT SSHD with an 8Gb SSD cache as the data drive where I have the OS on a 128GB Crucial M4 SSD. I didn't keep any detailed stats on the set up. I ran it for a few days but I could tell no difference in app loading, accessing data, saving data.

After about a week I run AS SSD on the SSHD and it scored considerably lower than the HDD I had been using, Seagate Momentus. (Both are 2.5" drives)

My conclusion is that a SSHD would likely do much better as an OS drive than for a data drive. There's not much of the same data accessed on the data drive so the SSHD controller I suspect would be swapping data in and out all the time. An OS on the other hand re-uses data often, e.g. boot files, browsers, email and so on.
That was close to the experience I had and came to the same conclusion, only I had the SSHD partitioned off for data and OS and, initially, app and OS loading was faster. It would have worked out better if my data had been far more static.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
.

24 Dec 2013   #14
LMiller7

Windows 7 Pro 64 bit
 
 

Loading an application is a very demanding task for a conventional hard drive. Modern operating systems do not initially load all of the application into memory but only those portions when they are needed. Loading an application means loading a few blocks of the exe, a few blocks from a dll, back to the exe for a few more blocks, and so it continues until the application is running. Modern operating systems have many optimizations to make the process more efficient but the basic principles remain the same. Once data is in memory the OS will try to keep it there for as long as possible, consistent with other demands on memory. This saves a great deal of memory. Modern large applications contain a great deal of code that is rarely used, and for some individual users not at all. Keeping all that unused code in memory all the time is wasteful and would impair performance. This method is not new, having been used in virtually all versions of Windows for the last 20 years.

This means that a conventional drive will be doing a large number of seeking to the data needed. Modern drives have high transfer rates but that doesn't matter much when you read only a few blocks at a time, then it is off to read something else. An SSD is in it's element for this kind of thing as seek times are almost non-existent. That means the drive can spend much more of it's time transferring data, not moving a mechanical head to where it is found.

Reading data tends to be more serial in nature so there is less head movement. An SSD will still be a benefit but not so much. And considering the current cost of SSDs putting all of your data on on such a device is rather expensive.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
24 Dec 2013   #15
whs
Microsoft MVP

Vista, Windows7, Mint Mate, Zorin, Windows 8
 
 

In addition to the caching on the SSD part of the SSHD there is also caching in RAM by Superfetch. If you have a lot of RAM on the system, that can be considerable. It is probably impossible to divide the SSD effect from the RAM effect.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
19 Jul 2015   #16
AWM

Win 10 Pro 64bit
 
 

The disc speed of the 1TB SSHD is 7200 rpm not 5400 rpm, the 4tb version is 5900 rpm.
http://www.seagate.com/staticfiles/s...100726566b.pdf checkout page 11.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
Reply

 SSHD - Performance comparison with HDD and SSD




Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search




Similar help and support threads
Thread Forum
Intel hiding true performance comparison alongside AMD
Yesterday while browsing a popular imageboard's technology forums I came across an interesting link to a youtube video related to AMD FX-8350 Vishera chip, the main topic of the video was a bit surprising, among the lines of a single FX-8350 chip beating the crap out of 3 intel workhorses including...
Hardware & Devices
SSD/HD vs SSD/SSHD vs SSHD combinations
I just purchased a 128GB SSD to install in my PC and then someone gave me for my birthday a 1TB SSHD. I was originally planning to pair the SSD with a 1TB data drive. I now have several possibilities: 1. Use the SSHD only 2. Use the SSD as the boot drive with a HD data drive (original...
Hardware & Devices
Performance comparison btw. Windows 7 Home Basic versus Home Premium
Hi Please advice on the performance comparison between - Windows 7 Home Basic versus - Windows 7 Home Premium assuming if both uses the same 8GB RAM. Just a hearsay...that Windows 7 Home Basic is lagging behind Windows 7 Home Premium in terms of performance assuming if both uses the...
Performance & Maintenance
Performance Comparison of Web Browsers.
Source - Web Browser Performance
Browsers & Mail
Performance comparison
Ive run a couple of benchmarks comparing Windows XP 32-bit vs Windows 7 64-bit. Shouldn't I be getting better fps in windows 7 64 bit? Windows 7 64 bit CSS Stress Test 94.93 HL2 Lost Coast Stress Test 60.78 COH Great, avg 54.9 max 62.1 min 33.5 Windows 7 without sidebar CSS Stress Test...
Gaming
Mainstream Quad-Core CPU Performance Comparison
more..
Hardware & Devices


Our Sites

Site Links

About Us

Find Us

Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

Designer Media Ltd

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 15:32.

Twitter Facebook Google+



Windows 7 Forums

Seven Forums Android App Seven Forums IOS App