Intel Smart Response Tech (SRT): Messiah or False Prophet?

**Lemur** · 09-21-2011, 13:30

So I was having some trouble sleeping last night, and I started play-building new gaming PCs I have no intention of buying. Anyway, on one configurator they were talking about pairing up a SSD with an HD for Intel SRT tech. Hmmm? says your neighborhood lemur.

Here's what Anandtech has to say about the technology.

Intel's Smart Response Technology (SRT) is an interesting addition to the mix. For starters, it's not going to make your high end SSD obsolete. You'll still get better overall performance by grabbing a large (80-160GB+) SSD, putting your OS + applications on it, and manually moving all of your large media files to a separate hard drive. What SRT does offer however is a stepping stone to a full blown SSD + HDD setup and a solution that doesn't require end user management. You don't get the same performance as a large dedicated SSD, but you can turn any hard drive into a much higher performing storage device. Paired with a 20GB SLC SSD cache, I could turn a 4-year-old 1TB hard drive into something that was 41% faster than a VelociRaptor.

Further reading with HardOCP and LegitReviews.

So is this the real deal? I've shied away from thinking about SSDs because of the crazy price tag. Sure, I'd love to have my OS and all of my games on a super-fast flash drive, but a large-capacity SSD is like a thousand bucks all by itself.

But if I can pair up a 2-terabyte monster WD drive with, say, a 60-gig SSD drive acting as a cache ... can I have my cake and eat it too?

Has any Orgah gotten any hands-on time with an SRT config?

**naut** · 09-21-2011, 13:59

It does look good. However, it's only on high end Intel mobos, which are expensive. Plus simple laws of economics dictate that over time SSDs should become more reasonably priced. SSDs are still the next big thing in IT, one of our rivals just bought $0.25mil of SSDs... and they wouldn't have done so without good reason.

Also wear would be issue using an SSD as a cache that constantly reads/writes to move files. Lifespan could be quite short, which at current prices isn't preferable.

**Tellos Athenaios** · 09-22-2011, 01:16

At 60GB or over in capacity you might want to make the SSD your OS + apps drive and be done with it. You can put Windows 7 64bit Pro, Office 2007 Enterprise and a few apps comfortably on a 20GB disk. It's only when I added Visual Studio the whole thing went downhill. A minimal config of VS Ultimate nixed about 9 of my remaining gigabytes so now I only have less than 700Mb for files.

Just prioritise your files and then 60GB is quite enough to have your cake and eat it, too.

**Lemur** · 09-22-2011, 02:31

Originally Posted by Tellos Athenaios

60GB is quite enough to have your cake and eat it, too.

I can destroy your argument with one word: steamapps.

Word, Excel and PPT are plenty fast for this lemur. It's mah games that need speed.

**Tellos Athenaios** · 09-22-2011, 02:45

Yeah, but at 60GB you still get to spend about 40 on games and collections of bad music videos.

**naut** · 09-22-2011, 09:36

Originally Posted by Lemur

I can destroy your argument with one word: steamapps.

There's a workaround for that. My friend uses it, and so will I when my SSDs arrive. I can provide it for you if you so desire.

**Lemur** · 09-23-2011, 14:34

Just measured my Steam folder. 73 gigs and change. That's a whole lotta SSD to support my gaming habit. Psycho, I would be curious to hear your friend's multi-volume solution.

**Alexander the Pretty Good** · 09-23-2011, 15:11

There's third party software (that I don't remember the name of) that will move steam games around for you without making you deal with manually uninstalling and reinstalling them on your preferred drive. So you can put whatever game you're currently playing on the SSD then move it to your standard HDD when you're finished with it.

I need to find it again since I'm putting in my new SSD (on top of my new mobo, CPU, RAM, and RAID 1 setup) some weekend when I have more time.

**Lemur** · 09-23-2011, 15:45

Meh, I think I just need to get with the notion that I'm going to budget a 120 gig-or-so SSD drive when I do my next build. The longer I can hold out, the more the prices will drop, right?

-edit-

Moreover, this comment by a writer familiar with SRT on an enterprise level makes me worry that Intel's implementation is really, really hard on the SSD drive:

Both the Adaptec and LSI controllers uses expensive ROC (RAID-On-Chip) processors that perform the same functions as SRT but do so while being gentle with the SSD. Intel’s solution doesn’t specifically call for a Single-Level Cell SSD but Intel choose to release a SLC SSD specifically for this reason. Due to its high cost, SLC is only used in enterprise class solid state drives these days and that leads me to believe the Intel Smart Response Technology isn’t all that gentle to the SSDs needs and that when used in Maximum Mode, the SSD takes a fair amount of punishment.

**Risasi** · 09-24-2011, 00:13

Not all SSD drives are created equal, specifically regarding performance and reliability. But you can get a decent 120GB SSD for a laptop for around $200 now. Other World Computing, Kingston and Intel are the brands on my short list. But one has to shop each specific model and check reviews. It also seems dependent upon whether you're buying for a desktop or mobile computer.

I thought about taking out my optical drive in my laptop and using an SSD+HDD. One hesitation I have is that what happens if one or the other drive fails? I have just added the complexity and increased the chance of a drive failure. It's enough to make me just shelve this task until later. Bleeding edge is rarely worth the extra hassle factor. Goes in the tickler file for me...