Boots just as fast, perhaps, is it as fast as installing programs, extracting files, copying and moving files and a host of things an ssd does better than a sshd. No. I don't follow the easier to configure content either, plug drives in relevant sata ports and that's all the configuration you need or at most changing boot priority in bios. I'd still rather have a dedicated ssd os drive or in an ideal world just a 2tb+ ssd if they weren't still somewhat expensive. I think if I was buying my drives today the only thing I'd change is likely go for a 250/500gb ssd and 2tb+ hdd though prices are cheaper now than when I bought mine.
We have not installed a HD in 7 years except for test purposes. Just about every build we do is SSD + SSHD. If budget restrictions exist and both can't be done, we'll install the SSHD with OS on it's own partition. Then OS can be reinstalled when money available for adding SSD. Since 2011,we have had:
(3) SSD failures - These were all older models, one of the failures was a warranty replacement.
(0) SSHD failures - Oldest is going on 8 years old
(0) SSD failures - Not relevant really, the ones we had when we swithced to SSHDs were justed rotated out of service when they reached 5 years old.
We have a test bed here:
Boot Time 2 TB Seagate Barracuda - 21.2 seconds
Boot Time 2 TB Seagate SSHD - 16.5 seconds
Boot Time 2 TB Samsung SSD pro - 15.6 seconds
The thing about SSD + HD is ONLY the stuff on the SSD benefits. In your typical 250 GB + 2TB scenario, that's not enough for most folks gaming libraries. In gaming, the SSHD scores 50% faster than the WD Black, so here's how it shakes out.
SSD + HD ... You will get the benefits of the SSD for OS and programs if you choose on the SSD. Your gaming and data retrieval will be limited to HD performance.
SSD + SSHD... You will get the benefits of the SSD for OS and programs if you choose on the SSD. Your gaming and data retrieval will be limited to slightly better than HD performance on 1st load. By the time you load that game for the 3rd time, all the frequently used files will be on the SSD portion of the SSHD and the game will load faster. So if you are the type of gamer who plays Far Cry 3 and then moves onto FC 4, by the time you load FC4 for the 3rd time, FC4's files will have replaced FC3's files on the faster portion of the drive. If you are like my youngest son, you might play 11 different games over a weekend... the advantages are less significant. This also works in the office as folks tend to work on a few projects at a time. As engineer's we design plants, restaurants and buildings so I we are pretty much using the same files for aperiod of 3 months for 2 or 2 projects...they all exist on the SSD portion and when one project is finished, those files are moved off behind the scenes and the new ones automatically replaced. That is what was meant by "easier configuration" ... If you want to use the remaining SSD space to play the 'currenbt game" of use current project files, you have to install / reinstall or move the file locations back and forth whenever returning to that game / project.
The reality however is that the storage speed impact is neglible in the grand scheme of things. we most notice storage subsysystem performance on a new build when we are moving many GB of files and installing many programs .... here the performance difference can be noticeable, even more so because you are watching it, waiting to do the next thing. Once past that 1st week, doing normal things, anything that the SSD excels at, is being done in the background (i.e backing up many GB of files). has any secretary every typed an extra legal brief before 5 pm because he / she had an SSD ? has any engineer completed an extra design component because they had an SSD ? Did anyone's productivity for the day improve because their system booted up 1-3 seconds faster ?
So what is the criteria here ... bragging rights ? or does the advantage benefit you in any way. When I arrive in the office, my box is booting while I'm listening to phone messages and returning phone calls. If the password screen arrives 2 seconds sooner, I'm not going to be doing much pen in hand on the phone. When I finish work and switch to gaming, after launching the game, I'm grabbing dinner ... when a new level loads, I'm taking a bio, stretching my legs or grabbing a snackie. I really don't care if I can compress 100 zip files or load 50 images in PhotoShop twice as fast cause I have never done any of those things.
On that testbox above, we had an OS install main programs and a game on every device and, using the BIOS boot menu, I switched what device the system booted from. had 45 different users on the machine for 6 weeks, no one noticed. Repeated same test with 2 laptops (SSD +_ HD on 1st and SSHD on 2nd) ... again after 6 weeks no one noticed.
The only point I am making here is most of us are nerdy enough that we get a bit obsessive about "what to pick", and while I pursue getting the fastest performance possible within stated budget, it's not like it's actually going to have a significant effect on our lives.
There's another thing worth mentioning ... with the SSHD, you will spend a bit more money for 1 or 2 TB of storage as compared to a HD. However, with the OS, programs and most frequently used files on the SSD portion, the mechanical part of that HD will spin a lot less often, thereby saving wear and tear that a HD would otherwise experience. My guess is that is a significant reason for the longevity which we have been experiencing.
So right now, to my PoV, as long as 2 TB of storage on SSD is still a bit pricey, I don't see us moving to or recommending SSDs for large storage except in wokstation applications involving video editing, animation or rendering where there's a payback on the performance gain. OTOH, the longevity we have been experiencing with the SSHDs and the performance gains, even of not life changing, make the cost increase, extra 3 years warranty over the Barracuda easily justifiable.
$60 / $95 for 1 and 2 TB SSDs versus $45 / $65 for the Barracuda. The equivalent HD (WD Black) w/ 5 year warranty is $100 / $120 ... so from a warranty perspective, it's a no brainer. Of course if budget not an issue, no reason not to go all out SSD.