Thinking about purchasing a Hybrid SSD (ST1000LM014) as a cache drive

[needo]

Would it be worth the $100? Would I see any real performance increase over my existing 1TB 5400 RPM drive? Or should I spend the extra $100 for a 250GB pure SSD?

 

http://www.seagate.com/internal-hard-drives/laptop-hard-drives/laptop-solid-state-hybrid-drive/?sku=ST1000LM014

 

Thank you,

 

needo

[garycase]

Probably not.  Unless you're using add-ins/plug-ins that write to the cache locally.  If you're only using it to speed up writes to the array, the improvement will be nominal, as you're limited to the Gb network speed.    Just how much depends on which 1TB drive you have -- if it's a modern 1TB/platter drive, it can likely already saturate the Gb network and you'd get NO improvement.  If it's an older unit with 500GB (or even smaller) platters, then you'd get a notable improvement with a faster drive -- but I wouldn't bother with an SSD or hybrid ... I'd buy a 2 or 3TB 1TB/platter unit.

 

[needo]

I do a lot of uncompressing and moving around large video files. Averaging around to 3-4GB per. In addition to running Plex. My cache drive is quite busy most of the time.

[garycase]

In that case, I'd get an SSD, not a hybrid.

 

[mr-hexen]

Speed can only be as fast as the slowest link in the chain.

[needo]

Speed can only be as fast as the slowest link in the chain.

 

Correct, but when there are such applications as Plex, Sickbeard, Sabnzbd that live entirely on the SSD drive and do not touch shfs through the FUSE abstraction layer there is some real speed increases that are possible.

[jumperalex]

Then you don't want a hybrid, you want an SSD to avoid Plex keeping the cache drive spinning.  Or better yet, use a spinner for cache and get an SSD to mount outside the array.  I'm setup like that and its working very well.

[needo]

Then you don't want a hybrid, you want an SSD to avoid Plex keeping the cache drive spinning.  Or better yet, use a spinner for cache and get an SSD to mount outside the array.  I'm setup like that and its working very well.

 

Thank you. I just cannot figure out if the performance gains in sabnzbd, sickbeard, couchpotato and plex is worth the high premium of a SSD drive. The geek in me says "Who cares?! New! Shiny! Buy now!" whereas the realist is looking at the monetary cost.

[WeeboTech]

If money is the issue, purchase a drive that is the same or better then your parity drive.

At least with a cache drive the same size as your parity, you have a warm spare should you loose a drive.

In emergency, move data off the cache onto the array.

Swap the cache drive into the array.

Purchase a new cache drive.

 

 

If speed is the issue, go with a 3TB 7200 RPM drive, 750GB Hybrid drive or an SSD.

The 1TB Hybrids are not that good from what I read, however the 750GB hybrids are great. I have a few.

[needo]

Thank you. I am eyeing the 750GB or 1TB SSD but they are pretty damn expensive.

 

What 750GB hybrid SSDs do you like? And how do they compare.

 

Thank you all for your help.

[garycase]

The hybrid drives are nice, but with constantly changing data, they're not going to work as well as they do in a more-typical setup (e.g. an OS boot drive), where they are likely to have frequently-accessed data cached in the SSD component.  The problem is the SSD cache is typically fairly small (8-16GB) ... some newer models are expected to have 32-64GB NAND units, which would make this much better.

 

In short, while it will indeed work better than a simply rotating drive; you'd get much more improvement with just an SSD.    I'd get a 256GB SSD, which seems to be the current "sweet spot" for SSD capacity:price ... you can often get these on sale for less than $200.

 

[needo]

The hybrid drives are nice, but with constantly changing data, they're not going to work as well as they do in a more-typical setup (e.g. an OS boot drive), where they are likely to have frequently-accessed data cached in the SSD component.  The problem is the SSD cache is typically fairly small (8-16GB) ... some newer models are expected to have 32-64GB NAND units, which would make this much better.

 

In short, while it will indeed work better than a simply rotating drive; you'd get much more improvement with just an SSD.    I'd get a 256GB SSD, which seems to be the current "sweet spot" for SSD capacity:price ... you can often get these on sale for less than $200.

 

Yeah, but my Plex directory by itself is 150GB. (Due to all the indexes)

[garycase]

In that case you'd probably need a 512GB unit ... I have seen this size on sale for under $300, but $400 is a more typical price.

 

[needo]

In that case you'd probably need a 512GB unit ... I have seen this size on sale for under $300, but $400 is a more typical price.

 

Yeah, I am shopping now.

[jumperalex]

Just to jump in again, the SSD for things like Plex etc is less about speed usually and more about not having a driving spinning 24/7.  But sheesh a 150GB Plex index Not sure what to say about that if you can't spring for at least a 250GB SSD for an apps drive other than get a drive, like a WD Red, spec'ed for 24/7 up-time and be sure to backup that index because rebuilding it would SUuUUUuuuUUUuuuCK!!!

 

Nice thing though about just doing a smaller SSD as an app drive is that you can save the money you would have spent on a larger one, on a spinner for cache.  But you need to decide how much you think you'll write every day and how many times you want the mover to run

 

 

[needo]

Just to jump in again, the SSD for things like Plex etc is less about speed usually and more about not having a driving spinning 24/7.  But sheesh a 150GB Plex index Not sure what to say about that if you can't spring for at least a 250GB SSD for an apps drive other than get a drive, like a WD Red, spec'ed for 24/7 up-time and be sure to backup that index because rebuilding it would SUuUUUuuuUUUuuuCK!!!

 

Nice thing though about just doing a smaller SSD as an app drive is that you can save the money you would have spent on a larger one, on a spinner for cache.  But you need to decide how much you think you'll write every day and how many times you want the mover to run

 

Yeah, I am eying a 480GB or 512GB SSD drive to replace the 1TB 5400 RPM cache drive as well. My current cache drive is speedy enough but trying to do a lot of unrar's or a mover and any thing else is very very very slow.

 

It took a couple of months to index all the files. It was a very large undertaking.

[garycase]

Yes, I'm sure that indexing was a LONG process that you don't want to repeat.

 

I DO hope you have a backup of it !!  [You should, of course, have a backup of your entire array]

 

I'd think a 480-512GB SSD would work well for a cache drive that could also host Plex.

 

... particularly considering that in the future you'll be able to add additional SSDs and set up a cache pool, once the btrfs cache pool is implemented.    Not sure how far that's slipped -- it was originally promised for v5.0, but didn't make it, so I'd expect it in a relatively near-term release (at least within a year, if not sooner).

[needo]

Yes, I'm sure that indexing was a LONG process that you don't want to repeat.

 

I DO hope you have a backup of it !!  [You should, of course, have a backup of your entire array]

 

I'd think a 480-512GB SSD would work well for a cache drive that could also host Plex.

 

... particularly considering that in the future you'll be able to add additional SSDs and set up a cache pool, once the btrfs cache pool is implemented.    Not sure how far that's slipped -- it was originally promised for v5.0, but didn't make it, so I'd expect it in a relatively near-term release (at least within a year, if not sooner).

 

I was thinking the same thing... Having a 1TB cache drive is nice but I hardly ever use 50% of it during a given day. (It was an old spare drive I had laying around.)

 

In doing some comparison shopping...

 

Crucial M500

    960GB

          $628.44 (TigerDirect)

          $599.68 (Amazon)

          $569.02 (Newegg)

    480GB

          $401.11 (TigerDirect)

          $372.36 (Amazon)

          $389.02 (Newegg)

 

Samsung 840 EVO-Series

    750GB

          $N/A (Fry's)

          $512.99 (Amazon)

          $513.02 (Newegg)

         

    500GB

          $400.51 (Fry's)

          $370.99 (Amazon)

          $359.02 (Newegg)

 

I just cannot justify the 960GB drive for that much money no matter how much I want too! I am leaning towards the Crucial M500 480GB hard drive. (These prices are with taxes and one day shipping or store pickup.)

 

EDIT: Actually upon doing some googling it seems Samsung 500GB is roughly the same price and has better benchmarks with 20GB more.

[garycase]

In the FWIW department, the ONLY SSD's I buy these days (based on experience with quite a few different models over the past few years) are Intel and Crucial.    Based solely on my bias from those experiences, I'd get the Crucial M500.

 

[sureguy]

I like weebotech's idea, but any users that employ it need to be aware that they have to preclear the drive or let unraid zero it out prior to using the drive. This will lead to a not insignificant amount of downtime.

 

Sent from a mobile device, sorry for any typos.

 

 

[garycase]

I like weebotech's idea ...

 

I also agree that using a cache drive as large as the parity drive allows you to have effectively a "hot spare" ==> HOWEVER, that's not a practical thing to do when your goal is to use a non-spinning (e.g. SSD) drive to both speed things up and eliminate the spun-up drive(s), as in this case.

 

I suppose, if you you're willing to limit yourself to 3TB drives (not 4TB), you could use a pair of 1.6TB SSDs in RAID-0 to create a 3.2TB "parity" drive that would still let you use 3TB drives in your array.    But at $10,958.47 EACH, a pair of those probably cost a bit more than most want to spend    [ http://www.pinnaclemicro.com/computer/parts.php?g=ZD4RM88-FH-1.6T&m=Ocz+Technology&gclid=COGBwP60k7oCFeRj7AodTCgACg ]

 

[WeeboTech]

Yes, I'm sure that indexing was a LONG process that you don't want to repeat.

 

I DO hope you have a backup of it !!  [You should, of course, have a backup of your entire array]

 

I'd think a 480-512GB SSD would work well for a cache drive that could also host Plex.

 

... particularly considering that in the future you'll be able to add additional SSDs and set up a cache pool, once the btrfs cache pool is implemented.    Not sure how far that's slipped -- it was originally promised for v5.0, but didn't make it, so I'd expect it in a relatively near-term release (at least within a year, if not sooner).

 

I was thinking the same thing... Having a 1TB cache drive is nice but I hardly ever use 50% of it during a given day. (It was an old spare drive I had laying around.)

 

In doing some comparison shopping...

 

Crucial M500

    960GB

          $628.44 (TigerDirect)

          $599.68 (Amazon)

          $569.02 (Newegg)

    480GB

          $401.11 (TigerDirect)

          $372.36 (Amazon)

          $389.02 (Newegg)

 

Samsung 840 EVO-Series

    750GB

          $N/A (Fry's)

          $512.99 (Amazon)

          $513.02 (Newegg)

         

    500GB

          $400.51 (Fry's)

          $370.99 (Amazon)

          $359.02 (Newegg)

 

I just cannot justify the 960GB drive for that much money no matter how much I want too! I am leaning towards the Crucial M500 480GB hard drive. (These prices are with taxes and one day shipping or store pickup.)

 

EDIT: Actually upon doing some googling it seems Samsung 500GB is roughly the same price and has better benchmarks with 20GB more.

 

 

wow, so a 960GB SSD is only $200 more then a 480 gb with twice the amount of space?

I think I might bite the bullet on that one considering how you usually need to leave some free space for performance, garbage collection and spare cells.

 

 

In any case, my 250GB Samsung 840 PRO's have been performing like champs on my laptops and ESX machines. Let me tell you I beat the hell out of them!

[WeeboTech]

Thank you. I am eyeing the 750GB or 1TB SSD but they are pretty damn expensive.

 

What 750GB hybrid SSDs do you like? And how do they compare.

 

Thank you all for your help.

 

 

I like the seagate momentus XT hybrid drives. The 750 is 7200 RPM, the 1TB is 5400 RPM. I've read they are not as fast.

The SSD is built into the 2.5" drive. The firmware monitors LBA's and cache's specific LBA's.

This means that many of the filesystem's basic tables/LBA's will be in cache.

[WeeboTech]

http://hothardware.com/Reviews/Samsung-SSD-840-EVO-Series-250GB--1TB-Drives-Tested/?page=1

 

I was just reading this article, The 1TB SSD has a 12GB DRAM Cache.

 

[needo]

http://hothardware.com/Reviews/Samsung-SSD-840-EVO-Series-250GB--1TB-Drives-Tested/?page=1

 

I was just reading this article, The 1TB SSD has a 12GB DRAM Cache.

 

Very nice. I settled on the Samsung SSD 840 EVO 500GB drive. I had a hard time justifying spending that much money for 1TB. And I am very very happy with the purchase. The performance gains have been immediate.