blue (blue.delete@this.blue.com) on April 20, 2019 8:29 pm wrote:
> David Hess (davidwhess.delete@this.gmail.com) on April 20, 2019 7:29 pm wrote:
> > Andrew Clough (someone.delete@this.somewhere.com) on April 17, 2019 10:21 am wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm sort of surprised that made much of a different. The hybrid drive benchmarks I saw didn't tend to look
> > > much better than the raw underlying drive, though going from 5400 to 7200 obliviously makes a difference.
> >
> > Hybrid drives have always disappointed. I wonder if it is because caching
> > through the OS can preferentially work on metadata and the smallest files.
> >
>
> Isn't Apple's hybrid solution viewed as being okay?
>
> I've not a clue, but that probably would be the best starting point for determining how well
> Sony could make it work. As Apple is the closest to console like integration in the PC space?

In my (admittably narrow) experience it was OK if your data set was smaller (by some margin) than the cache drive. For example, compiling code worked great, because source files and temporary files fit to SSD. Getting an SVN update for much larger binary data was go-and-get-a-cup-of-tea-then-start-working-on-something-else slow though. It was probably great for "average user".

I think a less transparent solution would work better for game console, unless the base line is a console without SSD.

-JLarja