ok my aging 250gb os drive (still fine no errors) has arrived at the point where its time to change it. i have decided to go for a 1tb wd red drive (still couldnt justify the £80 for a 256gb ssd when it cam to hit pay) any way the wd red is bought and paid for so not a point of debat.. what i am thinking about though is buying a SSD and using it as a cache drive (kind of making my own hybrid) the drive i am looking at is a Transcend's SSD340 SATA III 6Gb/s SSD 32 or 64gb (probably 64) but the specs are Max. Read - 200MB/s Max. Write - 45MB/s Max. Random 4k Read - 33,000 IOPS Max. Random 4k Write - 18,000 IOPS "high-quality synchronous multi-level cell (MLC) NAND flash memory to offer continued reliable performance" which seems a bit slow, but if its going to last a while then thats not to bad as i just need a bit of a boost.. or i can get a 40gb intel ssd (pretty much same performance. but may be easier to set up as a cache drive.) http://ark.intel.com/products/56568/Intel-SSD-320-Series-40GB-2_5in-SATA-3Gbs-25nm-MLC question is. should i bother with a cache drive or not. theres no point saying "get a xxx drive for $$$" in my budget those are what i can buy. the question isnt is there a better option. it is simply will this configuration last a good while and will it be noticably faster compared to just the wd red. (chose the red over black as i have my pcs on 24/7 and this drive should last the longest. i chose 1tb over 2tb to give scope for the small ssd if it will benifit) this is one of the times i perobably will go with the majority. the choices are in budget. but im cheap.. if you say it gonna work and is probably worth it. then il spend the extra. if you say it a bit pointless or that the drive will die fast being used as a cache and i should save the money. then il just spend it on something els. probably alcohol and cigaretts. you can say get the intel drive or get the transcend drive if you think one is better than the other and there is a point.