SSHD

Posted May 14, 2015 16:22 UTC (Thu) by marcH (subscriber, #57642)
In reply to: Trading off safety and performance in the kernel by zlynx
Parent article: Trading off safety and performance in the kernel

> As long as spinning hard drives are cheaper per GB there will always be people claiming SSD is too expensive. But at some point it gets to be like claiming your laptop needs a tape drive or a floppy.

As long as you can have more storage for the same price, why would you not? Pictures and movies don't need SSD performance at all.

Asking whether SSDs will win over spinning drives is like asking whether L1 caches will win over L2 caches.

Desktop users have solved this problem long ago: they get one small and cheap SSD for the system and applications + one big and cheap HD for pure storage. For laptops SSHDs look interesting. Two drives in a single enclosure.

There is however something entirely different which is killing spinning drives much faster than SSD price points: the cloud. Making the idea of local storage itself obsolete. Laptops with a small and dirty cheap eMMC used mainly as a network cache.