[probably offtopic]nowhere to find 3.5 segate firecuda

[tonimark]

idk if it is for offtopic but what happened to 3.5 seagate firecudas ? only 2.5 inch are available for both 1 and 2 tb of storage ? even the official seagate vendor website didn't showed any firecudas so did they all BUY THE 3.5 inches ? or its just a shortage like graphics card? or segate discontinued the product? anyways ONLY 3.5 wd black is avaible or 2.5 inch firecuda (and yes you told me) 2.5 drives are bad in performance terms but there have been out of stock for more than a year
EDIT:found out that seagate firecuda 2.5 had only 4500 rpms instead of 7200 rpms thats why noone bought it but still it was the only hydrid drive in the market
EDIT:found out my old pc supports intel storage techology i can install a small ssd and make my current hdd hybrid which solves the problem

[nullable]

That might be a question for Seagate. I mean no one much cares about SSHD drives, so I'd be skeptical of random/unsourced opinions.

My guess would be it's a product at the end life and/or not valuable enough to keep around. Or it's also possible there's a revision coming and old stock needed to be cleared out first. again, probably a question for Seagate.

[tonimark]

Originally posted by Snakub Plissken:

That might be a question for Seagate. I mean no one much cares about SSHD drives, so I'd be skeptical of random/unsourced opinions.

My guess would be it's a product at the end life and/or not valuable enough to keep around. Or it's also possible there's a revision coming and old stock needed to be cleared out first. again, probably a question for Seagate.

you say its probably discontinued so i will save money for a 1tb SSD (yes these can be expensive) not to mention some DRAMLESS models may have worse performance over HDD i would which budget ssd is worse than a hdd and probably the reilability of the cheap ones

[nullable]

Well I wouldn't say probably. I'm just guessing based on what I believe I know about SSHD popularity. It was kind of a stopgap product and SSD's have gotten so cheap that I can imagine there not being that much demand.

And sure it's possible to buy the worst SSD and have it sometimes not be as a good as a HDD. I wouldn't really consider than an issue unless your buying method is pulling SSDs out of a hat and you have sworn a blood oath you will buy whatever comes out of the hat, and you have pretty bad luck with hats.

I mean I only run SSDs these days (my system has 5.5TB of SSD space, 2.5TB NVMe and 3TB SATA). I know they're more expensive than HDDs. They also perform a lot better. And they cost a fraction of what they did a decade ago. Back in 2013 when I bought my first SSD we're talking nearly $1 per GB. And now we're at $0.10-$0.11 cents per GB. Considering the benefits I'm pretty happy with that. And in my experience good storage performance helps with overall system performance so I'm willing to pay for that.

It's just not a thing everyone has been sold on yet. And it's not like storage is the most exciting thing about the PC anyway. Five or six years ago I thought about getting some SSHD's myself. But with SSD prices being pretty cheap now from my perspective that really kind of negates any need I'd have for SSHDs. Although if I had to buy a HDD I'd probably want it to be an SSHD, because the SSD part would still help quite a bit.

[tonimark]

Originally posted by Snakub Plissken:

Well I wouldn't say probably. I'm just guessing based on what I believe I know about SSHD popularity. It was kind of a stopgap product and SSD's have gotten so cheap that I can imagine there not being that much demand.

And sure it's possible to buy the worst SSD and have it sometimes not be as a good as a HDD. I wouldn't really consider than an issue unless your buying method is pulling SSDs out of a hat and you have sworn a blood oath you will buy whatever comes out of the hat, and you have pretty bad luck with hats.

I mean I only run SSDs these days (my system has 5.5TB of SSD space, 2.5TB NVMe and 3TB SATA). I know they're more expensive than HDDs. They also perform a lot better. And they cost a fraction of what they did a decade ago. Back in 2013 when I bought my first SSD we're talking nearly $1 per GB. And now we're at $0.10-$0.11 cents per GB. Considering the benefits I'm pretty happy with that. And in my experience good storage performance helps with overall system performance so I'm willing to pay for that.

It's just not a thing everyone has been sold on yet. And it's not like storage is the most exciting thing about the PC anyway. Five or six years ago I thought about getting some SSHD's myself. But with SSD prices being pretty cheap now from my perspective that really kind of negates any need I'd have for SSHDs. Although if I had to buy a HDD I'd probably want it to be an SSHD, because the SSD part would still help quite a bit.

intel optane memory is not available for my (old) PC (no NVMe slot) any alternatives?

[nullable]

What's wrong with SATA SSD's? You were gonna get a SATA SSHD, and that was still going to be several times slower than a SATA SSD. I mean if it were me I'd just buy an Samsung 870 evo or qvo, or another current generation SATA SSD in the same class.

[cSg|mc-Hotsauce]

This?

https://www.newegg.com/seagate-firecuda-st2000dx002-2tb-mlc/p/N82E16822178996

[tonimark]

Originally posted by cSg|mc-Hotsauce:

This?

https://www.newegg.com/seagate-firecuda-st2000dx002-2tb-mlc/p/N82E16822178996

:qr:

NEWEGG DOESN'T SHIP TO MY COUNTRY anyways very good but i prefer the 1 tb variant

[tonimark]

Originally posted by tonimark:

Originally posted by cSg|mc-Hotsauce:

This?

https://www.newegg.com/seagate-firecuda-st2000dx002-2tb-mlc/p/N82E16822178996

:qr:

NEWEGG DOESN'T SHIP TO MY COUNTRY anyways very good but i prefer the 1 tb variant

oh wait more expensive ??! WHAT??! its not worth it an ssd would be a better deal

[Illusion of Progress]

Originally posted by tonimark:

you say its probably discontinued so i will save money for a 1tb SSD (yes these can be expensive) not to mention some DRAMLESS models may have worse performance over HDD i would which budget ssd is worse than a hdd and probably the reilability of the cheap ones

The only time offhand I can think of where an SSD should really be slower than an HDD in a real world scenario would be in the case of a QLC drive under a very large, sustained write operation when the cache has been depleted. Might be some other fringe cases that won't be perceptible but that's the only one I can think of offhand. This is bad, yes, but it's a worst case scenario, and the drive is still going to be way faster than an HDD elsewhere. And, unless you're using it as a storage drive, it's unlikely to be a real issue. I say this as someone who recommends avoiding QLC in place of TLC because it's very easy to do that (for now). But, even such an SSD is still worlds above an HDD for most things.

Some people with low storage needs are going for budget 1 TB and 2 TB SSDs as storage drives to drop HDDs entirely, so it's worth being aware of things like that. But, your overall thinking seems to be that because of such potential edge cases in some areas only, SSDs aren't worth it unless you go for a high end one, when... for a primary drive, you actually have it backwards IMO. The gap between a budget SSD and high end NVMe is smaller than that between HDD and budget SSD (except when it's not... meaning usually... and for most operations...). Fast NVMe usually have way high peak numbers, so if you have two of them and do large file operations a lot, they'll be faster, but for typical use (putting an OS on it, loading games from it, etc.), NVMe usually isn't worth the added cost for most people.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

What size drive you looking for?

[tonimark]

Originally posted by Bad 💀 Motha:

What size drive you looking for?

i look for speed not size which is faster? i know WD is faster is file transfer but segate is having more on loading screens ... also consider that segate is smaller and worse so which is better?

[Bad 💀 Motha]

Look at Seagate IronWolf 3.5 inch 7200 rpm
There 6 and 8 TB drives are fairly affordable; faster then any Baracuda ever was.

[tonimark]

Originally posted by Bad 💀 Motha:

Look at Seagate IronWolf 3.5 inch 7200 rpm
There 6 and 8 TB drives are fairly affordable; faster then any Baracuda ever was.

1.i don't need storage i would like 1tb
2.slighty expensive a SSD would be better
3.i use bios which is limited to 2TB

[Bad 💀 Motha]

Then you best bets are:

> WD Blue 3.5 inch 1TB 7200rpm
> A budget friendly SSD such as 1TB from Crucial, ADATA, Mushkin

If getting SSD for first time on that PC, clean install Win10 64bit 20H2 to the SSD.
Use HDDs for Storage; such as Games that don't benefit from SSD speeds, loose files, downloads, music, videos, photos. If do not have an updated Win10 on USB Flash Drive, make it yourself by connecting 8GB or larger USB Flash Drive to a working PC that has Win7 64bit or later, and download/run the Microsoft Media Creation Tool (aka Download Tool via official MS Win10 website)

[Electric Cupcake]

You don't have any 2.5 to 3.5 adapter rails lying around?