Basic $400 budget; no gaming; no rendering

[IVIYTH0S]

 

If it is a stream PC then why bother with ANY performance lose? Might be smaller size but a pure streaming build only needs the OS really. Even if he does do some pictures and music, unless he goes crazy 120 gig SSD will still be all the space he needs.

 

Here is the info I found:

 

1) Word Files (if each file is 25 pages on average) you need in excess of 12K files to make 1 gig. Excel files are pretty small as well and people usually have MUCH fewer of them than word files.

 

2) Pictures (assuming every picture is a 10 Megapixel photo in JPG, most photos are JPG in format) comes to around 1200 for 1 gig on average.

 

3) Music: Using my smaller library for a standard I have 17 hours of music and that uses 0.75 Gig.

 

4) lets figure 1 gig per movie stored as well since most people storing movies compress them.

 

This means if you have 12,000 documents, 1200 photos, 17 hours of music and 10 movies you have used about 13 gig. On a typical 120 gig SSD this leaves about 105 gig or so of formatted space for the OS and software. So even if he is not streaming, unless he is a serious hoarder, based on his own usage model a 120 Gig SSD would give him a good deal of space without any lose in general performance that anything other than an SSD has by comparison. SSHD's are okay but at their cost either go with a 7200 RPM drive and get more space or an SSD and get more performance.

They only coast $100 for about a 1tb. It's just a 15 second loss. You're getting just about the same speed and more storage.

 

Define this 15 second loss, you mean things take 15 seconds longer because that'd be awful lol

[kennethk]

 

 

If it is a stream PC then why bother with ANY performance lose? Might be smaller size but a pure streaming build only needs the OS really. Even if he does do some pictures and music, unless he goes crazy 120 gig SSD will still be all the space he needs.

 

Here is the info I found:

 

1) Word Files (if each file is 25 pages on average) you need in excess of 12K files to make 1 gig. Excel files are pretty small as well and people usually have MUCH fewer of them than word files.

 

2) Pictures (assuming every picture is a 10 Megapixel photo in JPG, most photos are JPG in format) comes to around 1200 for 1 gig on average.

 

3) Music: Using my smaller library for a standard I have 17 hours of music and that uses 0.75 Gig.

 

4) lets figure 1 gig per movie stored as well since most people storing movies compress them.

 

This means if you have 12,000 documents, 1200 photos, 17 hours of music and 10 movies you have used about 13 gig. On a typical 120 gig SSD this leaves about 105 gig or so of formatted space for the OS and software. So even if he is not streaming, unless he is a serious hoarder, based on his own usage model a 120 Gig SSD would give him a good deal of space without any lose in general performance that anything other than an SSD has by comparison. SSHD's are okay but at their cost either go with a 7200 RPM drive and get more space or an SSD and get more performance.

They only coast $100 for about a 1tb. It's just a 15 second loss. You're getting just about the same speed and more storage.

 

Define this 15 second loss, you mean things take 15 seconds longer because that'd be awful lol

 

Boot up time.

 

[VaporX]

Again the question is if there is no need for the extra space why sacrifice ANY speed? BTW the benchamrks are all fine but a real world usage of a SSHD vs an SSD the SSD has always felt noticeable quicker to me.

[Waco]

Again the question is if there is no need for the extra space why sacrifice ANY speed? BTW the benchamrks are all fine but a real world usage of a SSHD vs an SSD the SSD has always felt noticeable quicker to me.

The newer SSHDs are far faster than the original models.

 

Though I agree, SSD all the way if the space isn't needed.

[kennethk]

Why not just have the extra space rather then limited space?

 

It's a Hybrid drive it's not like I'm suggesting something completely different would you rather have more space and wait just 15 seconds more?

[ET3D]

I recently built a PC for my father with a Pentium G3220. It's the same price as the A6-6400K (cheaper if you pick it up from a MicroCenter store, according to PCPartsPicker), but it's a faster CPU. Add a cheap H81 board and it will be cheaper than the AMD solution.

 

I'd go for 8GB RAM. While 4GB is a fine baseline, I saw Chrome take 1GB for a single web page (granted, it's the most memory hungry of the browsers), so I feel that 8GB is more future proof even when not using the PC for any advanced tasks.

[VaporX]

KennethK,  I am getting your point but you are missing mine. With online streaming and home NAS becoming affordable people are finding that they do not need the larger drives anymore. For example my gaming rig has Anno 2070, Demigod, Fallout: new Vegas, Neverwinter, XCOM, Rage and Sins all installed as well a few other programs I use regularly and of course various screen shots. On my 240 gig SSD I have 92 Gig free. WHY would I buy a bigger drive and either spend more money or sacrifice speed?

 

I am not saying an SSHD is a bad choice, I am saying it is a sacrifice, all choices are about a sacrifice in some way.

 

If you are building a pure streaming PC, one that gets all it's music and video content from the internet. It also does nothing else but surf and email. It does not store much of anything locally as it makes full use of the cloud, then a 60 Gig SSD is an amazing choice. You have enough space for your Windows install and basic apps, even a little local storage if needed and you get your system to be as quick as it possible can be.

 

I have used SSHD drives and they work well but my system is never as snappy as it is with a pure SSD solution.

[kennethk]

I wouldn't trust an ISP to always be online, theres always that risk of them having shortages and you really need/want to access a file and can't because your isp is down.

 

If you say SSHDs work well then why not suggest a cheaper 500GB driver that like 10 dollars cheaper that would give him more space? Why not just wait an extra 15-30 seconds and just have the more space if needed? If you're not comparing a snail to  a turtle what's the big deal? Hybrid drives are just as fast as an SSD and give you more storage. How is having more storage a bad thing? SSDs aren't meant to have a lot of files stored on them in the first place so if it's for work I imagine he'll be saving a lot of files.

 

This is a budget build for work key the word budget.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Seagate-Laptop-500GB-Drive-ST500LM000/dp/B00B99JU5M/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1390838312&sr=8-3&keywords=SSHD

 

Compared to

 

Say this was the cheapest I could find: http://www.amazon.com/Kingston-Digital-Adapter-Solid-SV300S37A-60G/dp/B00A35X6GM/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&qid=1390838365&sr=8-7&keywords=SSD

 

Even getting a 120GB SSD coasts more than getting a 500GB hybrid drive.

 

Theres only a few second difference if you pay attention to the charts listed on the Hybrid drive.

Edited January 27, 2014 by kennethk

[VaporX]

The charts are all nice but I am not talking about seconds or charts when I am talking about the experience difference. For me when I use any kind of spindle drive including an SSHD I feel like my system is trudging through mud, it feels slower and less responsive. As for more storage being a bad thing it is not but if you DO NOT NEED IT why bother? I mean I am curious why you are arguing this so hard. An SSHD is not as fast as a pure SSD solution it is that simple. No one is saying you are off base but we are saying that if the storage is not needed then a pure SSD is faster, which it is, why argue a fact?

[IVIYTH0S]

The charts are all nice but I am not talking about seconds or charts when I am talking about the experience difference. For me when I use any kind of spindle drive including an SSHD I feel like my system is trudging through mud, it feels slower and less responsive. As for more storage being a bad thing it is not but if you DO NOT NEED IT why bother? I mean I am curious why you are arguing this so hard. An SSHD is not as fast as a pure SSD solution it is that simple. No one is saying you are off base but we are saying that if the storage is not needed then a pure SSD is faster, which it is, why argue a fact?

I was always sold on SSD (for SSHD, where I'd be juggling the two choices....because desktops can just have any big storage drive added on the side) with power efficiency and shock resistance....which I guess doesn't apply here either but I agree with you on experience being everything. 

[kennethk]

The charts are all nice but I am not talking about seconds or charts when I am talking about the experience difference. For me when I use any kind of spindle drive including an SSHD I feel like my system is trudging through mud, it feels slower and less responsive. As for more storage being a bad thing it is not but if you DO NOT NEED IT why bother? I mean I am curious why you are arguing this so hard. An SSHD is not as fast as a pure SSD solution it is that simple. No one is saying you are off base but we are saying that if the storage is not needed then a pure SSD is faster, which it is, why argue a fact?

That's a bit of a hypocritical statement. Whats so bad about having more space that just gives you more storage. An SSD is just a hair faster but a hybrid drive has more space.  You're talking as if Hybrid drives are slow as they can be when in fact they have the same brains as an SSD.

 

Also why add later when you have the choice to be able to get it now? Again what's so bad about having more storage at the same coast as well as nearly the same speed? 

 

If this is going to be for work then I'm pretty sure more storage will be needed in the future so why not just have it now and not worry later.

Edited January 28, 2014 by kennethk

[VaporX]

Again I am not disputing if you need more storage and have to wonder why you seem so hell bent on beating a point no one is disputing. BTW work storage is often not an issue. For example if work is an Insurance company, 90% of the work is now done through online services and the actual storage is limited to Word files and I have shown no real space is needed for those. Storage space is dependent on a lot of issues and work actually seldom has large storage needs unless you are doing rendering and CAD, and even then storage needs might surprise you.