@UPSLynx said:
mmmm, five year old reviews with fresh localization.
And now SSD's are almost as cheap. So what's the point of bringing back the Jurassic DNA? just sayn
Lowest price I can find for a 700+ GB SSD is $450. Which is just a little bit (4x) more expensive than a 750GB Momentus XT at this point (and the 1T momentus XT is even less expensive than that, seems like the 750 isn't manufactured anymore?).
I don't think anyone would buy 4 times the cost being "almost as cheap". Spinning drives are still king when it comes to cost per byte. This still strikes a balance for people that need a large capacity drive on a budget, but want somewhat improved performance over just a spinning disk.
1TB SSDs regularly go for $250. Mushkin's 1TB SSD just went on sale for $205, recently. I'd be willing to step up to something far faster than a Momentus for that price.
Lowest price I can find for a 700+ GB SSD is $450. Which is just a little bit (4x) more expensive than a 750GB Momentus XT at this point (and the 1T momentus XT is even less expensive than that, seems like the 750 isn't manufactured anymore?).
Are you looking at Newegg and Amazon? 1TB haven't been 400+ in at least 3 months.
I guess the 600 & 750GB SSDs are just special snowflakes (I was looking at those specifically for a closer to apples-to-apples size comparison, didn't look further because I was busy, I shouldn't have said 700+, but rather specified I was looking in the roughly 700GB range). On NewEgg yesterday, the least expensive option in that size was around 450. Today it is 299, with the next cheapest being 359.
Still, not everyone needs the performance of an SSD. There are use cases for a Momentus XT. Personally, when it comes to my laptop (where I'm not really doing anything hardcore), I'd definitely spend half the money (115 for a 1T Momentus XT 32G, or 90 for the 8G) and use that $100+ savings to buy a really nice bottle of rye and a steak.
Oh, and saying that twice the price is "almost as cheap" is still wrong.
I certainly believe that the future is pure solid-state drives, not hybrids. I think hybrids are an interim step. They're sort of like an amphibian. You know, when life was going from the oceans to land, probably a lot of amphibians, but that's not the end solution. I think you want to go all solid-state because that is the truly better path and I think if you split the baby and you have a drive that is trying to be a good spinning hard drive and a good solid-state drive, you end up being not as compelling as either a pure spinner or pure SSD.
@drasnor said:
I certainly believe that the future is pure solid-state drives, not hybrids. I think hybrids are an interim step.
You'll get no argument from me here. This is absolutely correct.
I think you want to go all solid-state because that is the truly better path and I think if you split the baby and you have a drive that is trying to be a good spinning hard drive and a good solid-state drive, you end up being not as compelling as either a pure spinner or pure SSD.
Disagree here though. The point of a hybrid drive isn't to be a good SSD, it's to be a better HDD. It is the larger capacity, with improved performance over a spinning drive (made possible by caching frequently accessed data on a small SSD), at a cost savings versus a comparably sized SSD. It still hits on all three points at this time (half the price for the same amount of storage is compelling for certain people and use cases). I'm not saying they're the future, just that they still make sense in some cases at this time, and they made a lot of sense when this review was penned.
Just for one practical use case, I'm seriously considering getting one for my PS3 to improve game load times. I could put an SSD in there, but I don't play my PS3 so much that I really want to spend the extra $100 to go full SSD. The hybrid drive is like the sensible mid-range computer. Not everyone needs to spend top dollar for a high end rig, because not everyone has a use case that demands the most power on the market.
Also, that twice the price for an SSD is not "almost as cheap" as was said earlier.
How big of a drive do you need in the PS3? A 250GB SSD is under $90. At that point the fact it's "twice" the price of the 250GB 7200RPM drive is kind of irrelevant.
@RyanMM said:
How big of a drive do you need in the PS3? A 250GB SSD is under $90. At that point the fact it's "twice" the price of the 250GB 7200RPM drive is kind of irrelevant.
@RyanMM said:
How big of a drive do you need in the PS3? A 250GB SSD is under $90. At that point the fact it's "twice" the price of the 250GB 7200RPM drive is kind of irrelevant.
As big as will fit. Because why not?
Because there's no point to 1TB of slow-ass platter garbage if your footprint of games and media is 200GB.
@RyanMM said:
How big of a drive do you need in the PS3? A 250GB SSD is under $90. At that point the fact it's "twice" the price of the 250GB 7200RPM drive is kind of irrelevant.
As big as will fit. Because why not?
Because there's no point to 1TB of slow-ass platter garbage if your footprint of games and media is 200GB.
True. I was referring to capacity. No way I'd be caught dead upgrading a system with a hard drive unless it was a RAID array.
Comments
mmmm, five year old reviews with fresh localization.
And now SSD's are almost as cheap. So what's the point of bringing back the Jurassic DNA? just sayn
Lowest price I can find for a 700+ GB SSD is $450. Which is just a little bit (4x) more expensive than a 750GB Momentus XT at this point (and the 1T momentus XT is even less expensive than that, seems like the 750 isn't manufactured anymore?).
I don't think anyone would buy 4 times the cost being "almost as cheap". Spinning drives are still king when it comes to cost per byte. This still strikes a balance for people that need a large capacity drive on a budget, but want somewhat improved performance over just a spinning disk.
1TB SSDs regularly go for $250. Mushkin's 1TB SSD just went on sale for $205, recently. I'd be willing to step up to something far faster than a Momentus for that price.
Are you looking at Newegg and Amazon? 1TB haven't been 400+ in at least 3 months.
$190 after rebates.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820228144&utm_medium=Email&utm_source=IGNEFL033116&cm_mmc=EMC-IGNEFL033116--EMC-033116-Index--InternalSSDs-_-20228144-S1A2B
Bonus: Read the review.
I guess the 600 & 750GB SSDs are just special snowflakes (I was looking at those specifically for a closer to apples-to-apples size comparison, didn't look further because I was busy, I shouldn't have said 700+, but rather specified I was looking in the roughly 700GB range). On NewEgg yesterday, the least expensive option in that size was around 450. Today it is 299, with the next cheapest being 359.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100011693 600136716 600414703&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=30
Still, not everyone needs the performance of an SSD. There are use cases for a Momentus XT. Personally, when it comes to my laptop (where I'm not really doing anything hardcore), I'd definitely spend half the money (115 for a 1T Momentus XT 32G, or 90 for the 8G) and use that $100+ savings to buy a really nice bottle of rye and a steak.
Oh, and saying that twice the price is "almost as cheap" is still wrong.
I certainly believe that the future is pure solid-state drives, not hybrids. I think hybrids are an interim step. They're sort of like an amphibian. You know, when life was going from the oceans to land, probably a lot of amphibians, but that's not the end solution. I think you want to go all solid-state because that is the truly better path and I think if you split the baby and you have a drive that is trying to be a good spinning hard drive and a good solid-state drive, you end up being not as compelling as either a pure spinner or pure SSD.
You'll get no argument from me here. This is absolutely correct.
Disagree here though. The point of a hybrid drive isn't to be a good SSD, it's to be a better HDD. It is the larger capacity, with improved performance over a spinning drive (made possible by caching frequently accessed data on a small SSD), at a cost savings versus a comparably sized SSD. It still hits on all three points at this time (half the price for the same amount of storage is compelling for certain people and use cases). I'm not saying they're the future, just that they still make sense in some cases at this time, and they made a lot of sense when this review was penned.
Just for one practical use case, I'm seriously considering getting one for my PS3 to improve game load times. I could put an SSD in there, but I don't play my PS3 so much that I really want to spend the extra $100 to go full SSD. The hybrid drive is like the sensible mid-range computer. Not everyone needs to spend top dollar for a high end rig, because not everyone has a use case that demands the most power on the market.
Also, that twice the price for an SSD is not "almost as cheap" as was said earlier.
How big of a drive do you need in the PS3? A 250GB SSD is under $90. At that point the fact it's "twice" the price of the 250GB 7200RPM drive is kind of irrelevant.
As big as will fit. Because why not?
Because there's no point to 1TB of slow-ass platter garbage if your footprint of games and media is 200GB.
True. I was referring to capacity. No way I'd be caught dead upgrading a system with a hard drive unless it was a RAID array.