The main drive on my primary rig is an SSD, then I have FSX installed on a 500GB Raptor, and all of my scenery on another 500 GB raptor. FSX is very stable... way better than when my main drive was just a standard hard drive. We've all heard that when you have an SSD, you're not supposed to defrag, because the read-write cycles wear out the memory nodules on the drive. Since I tend to do alot of changes to FSX and my scenery files, I have them on the standard HD's for fear of wearing out memory nodules. I've done alot of digging, and it turns out that it takes millions of read-write ops to start wearing out the memory nodules on the newer SSD's. To put it in a time perspective, it's about 80 years worth of adding/deleting/defragging an SSD that will eventually wear it out. Now, I'm considering putting EVERYTHING on an SSD.
Since it is now fairly clear that we don't need worry about wearing out SSD's from massive adding/deleting/defragging of files on a regular basis, what about the "other" standard school of thought of separating FSX and scenery files to separate HD's? The premis of this method is based on the read/write head flying over the surface of the HD to retrieve, and you will get faster load times by having separate drives. But, the SSD can retrieve somewhat simultaneously.
So, here's my question. Since the SSD doesn't have a movable read/write head, is there any speed advantage to having FSX and scenery files on other drives? There's a new SSD that is 1 TB large, so my question is about speed, rather than space.