Dedicated cache drives
Probably the most useful alternatives to SRT are the solid-state cache drives offered by the likes of Corsair, Crucial and OCZ with their Accelerator, Adrenaline and Synapse products. These three and others use Nvelo’s Dataplex caching software. The software works with AMD as well as Intel chipsets - so it’s the obvious choice for folk with a dislike of Chipzilla products - but doesn’t support chipsets produced by Nvidia. These cache drives have another distinct advantage over Intel’s technology: you don’t have to disturb your original setup. Just fit the cache drive, download and install the software, tell it which is the drive being cached, and off you go. To make sure that the Dataplex install has worked and the drive is in cache mode, there is a utility included to allow you to check all is well.

Setting up Nvelo's Dataplex cache operation software
That’s all well and good, but what about laptop users who generally only have space for one drive in their machines? For these folk there is the hybrid drive: an HDD with a NAND Flash cache built in. Both Seagate and Samsung introduced hybrid drives a few years back and, it must be said, these early drives didn’t set the world on fire. Undeterred by this reaction, Seagate kept on with the concept and in early 2010 launched the Momentus XT range, a 2.5in drive is available as a first-generation drive with a 3Gb/s Sata interface and 500GB capacity, and as a second-generation 750GB unit with a 6Gb/s interface. The two are priced at £84 and £99, respectively. Both come with a 7200rpm spin speed and 32MB of normal cache. The 500GB drive has 4GB of SLC NAND while the 750GB has 8GB. WD is expected to launch a hybrid drive soon.

Dataplex comes with a quick-look status utility
Caching in Windows
In Windows 7, Microsoft turned off file defragmentation for SSDs, but with Windows 8 it’s back, albeit in a different guise. The new Storage Optimizer utility handles different kinds of storage in different ways. If it sees a standard hard disk in the system, it will regularly defrag it in the normal way to ensure file data is kept in contiguous sectors. However, if it sees an SSD, it will send a complete set of Trim hints for the entire volume. To make sure that the OS knows what drives or what kinds are in the system you need to run the Windows Experience Index at least once.
Real-time Trim hints are sent to the drive when the file system moves or deletes files, but the drive may not be able to react to the hints if it’s writing or erasing. The Storage Optimizer resends these hints when the system is in an idle state to make sure the SSD can react to them.
Testing
To explore the potential desktop performance benefits of Intel’s SRT technology and of SSD cache drives over a standard large capacity hard drive, I used an Asus P8Z77-V Premium motherboard which, as well as supporting SRT, comes with a 32GB LiteOn mSATA SSD already installed. I also had to hand a 30GB Corsair Accelerator (£47) SSD cache drive, which also comes in 45GB (£55) and 60GB (£80) capacities. I’ve a Crucial Adrenaline (£60) which comes in just one flavour, 50GB, too. I used both this 2.5in drive and the 30GB, 2.5in Corsair as alternatives to Intel’s technology. For the mechanical drive, I used one of Western Digital’s latest 4TB Black drives, a fast performer with a 7200rpm spin speed and 64MB of cache. I then threw a 120GB Scandisk Extreme SSD into the mix, a reasonably fast drive which you can pick up for around the £75 mark if you shop around.

PCMark 07 Overall Results
Longer bars are better
To get a feel of how the various caching technologies would work in a real life situation, I used Futuremark’s PCMark 07 benchmark suite. This provides various tests that mimic the kind of workloads a desktop or notebook PC might go through on a daily basis. The Gaming workload uses a trace of World of Warcraft being started up. Starting Apps is a trace of home and office productivity applications being started up, Importing Pictures uses a trace of 434MB of images being imported into Windows Live Photo Gallery, and the Windows Defender workload is a trace of the application running a quick scan of the system.

PCMark 07 'Gaming' Workload in megabytes per second (MB/s)
Longer bars are better

PCMark 07 'Starting Apps' Workload in megabytes per second (MB/s)
Longer bars are better

PCMark 07 'Importing Pics' Workload in megabytes per second (MB/s)
Longer bars are better

PCMark 07 'Windows Defender' Workload in megabytes per second (MB/s)
Longer bars are better
I ran the PCMark 07 benchmark four times to give the cache drive time to ‘learn’ which were the most accessed I/O blocks, and used the fourth run as the result to record.
Finally, to measure the boot time of the various combinations of SSD caching, I used the BootRacer application.
Next page: The Reg Verdict
COMMENTS
Not a single mention of Linux anywhere
Sad to see that Linux isn't mentioned (or indeed benchmarked) here, even if it's just to suggest what the equivalent of Intel's SRT is for Linux. If you're building a new machine, I'd expect it to have SATA 3 because SATA 3 SSD prices are continuing to fall.
The only sensible combo, IMHO, is a Sata 3 SSD with 500MB+/sec read/write and a fast multi-terabyte HDD (I use Seagate 3TB's myself at 225Mbytes/sec read). Throw in a fast multi-core CPU and you're not far off 10 seconds boot time, meaning that multi-boot isn't tiresome any more.
Missing - hybrid drive?
I'd really have liked to see that review also compare a hybrid drive such as Seagate Momentus. Yes, it's a slow sleepy 2.5 inch laptop drive, but how much difference does that built-in flash cache make? And being out past the drive end of the SATA connector, it'll work with Linux or anything else you care to boot.
With Linux it is trivially easy to put the operating system and your own small / heavily accessed files onto a small SSD. One can configure a completely useful Linux system in 30Gb (about 15Gb of system files, 15Gb /home). Unfortunately 30Gb SSDs are slower than 256Gb ones, but they share the same near-zero seek time. Again it would be nice to see that benchmarked.
Enquiring minds would like to know...
Why is it that in all SSD-related discussions, PCI-E based versions are never mentioned.
From what I could see (and have been using) PCI-E based SSD's tend to have the best performance compared to SATA III (6 Gbps) and due to the slot, they can accommodate sizeable capacities without any space limitations.
And yet, reading the reg you'd think they don't yet exist.
(It's not for lack of demo units, is it?)
Re: No need for any cache - just go pure SSD
"And a 512GB SSD would be enough for what exactly ?
Booting the OS maybe and just that.
Nowadays a PC can't have less than 2TB."
The VAST majority of users don't need anything approaching 2TB - My Gaming machine for example has a 250Gig Samsumg 830, running Win7Pro, Libre Office, a few other apps, Steam and about a Dozen Games installed, and there's room to spare.
Granted I'm not storing Gigs and gigs of Videos, and if I want to install a new game I need to install another, but where's the problem with that?
The overwhelming majority of users run Windows with some antivirus, Office apps and everything else they do is through their browser - that would all fit in a 64Gig drive without any issues at all.
And your comment about building 12TB of storage using SSDs only is argumentative and distinctly trollish. This article is about devices which are aimed at home/laptop use - no-one is suggesting using hybrid / cache drives for enterprise storage where 19" racks of dozens of disks are the norm.
Go and crawl back under your bridge.
Make your Own
As far as the Fusion Drive is concerned. All the tools for rolling your own are built into the file systems in Lion and Mountain Lion. I built one for my Mac Pro ( which is only SATA 2 ) with a 256GB SSD and a 2TB WD Black. Very nice increase in performance and drops you straight into login after about 10-15 secs.
