A SSHD is just a HDD with a read cache. The NUC does not really care.
As for licensing, it can become an issue when Windows 10 is involved. Cloning should not be an issue, however...
The NUC uses Win 7, 8GB ram. Originally I put 10, hated it, then 7. But 7 gave USB problems. Last October you replied to my USB posts that the USB Host Controller driver was missing from my list. I had to leave town and when I came back the thread was locked and I couldnt reply. But I downloaded the correct driver and it came with a warning that it may cause the keyboard and mouse to stop working. The solution would be to revert to Last Known Good and then it should be OK. So I didnt install the driver because:
1) If 7 was a new install, what would constitute Last Known Good?
2) How would a user get into the Bios to make that change if the keyboard and mouse didnt work?
Id like those answers if you know. So, I didnt install the driver yet. However, after the 4th install of 7 suddenly all the USB ports worked and have worked since. XHCI in the Bios is turned OFF. The NUC is smooth as silk with no issues in spite of missing drivers and god knows what else I screwed up. I decided not to poke the bear!
But 7 has its own problems and i'm on a dubious licence. Since my Toshiba 8.1 laptop ran fine, I've bought two 8.1 licences, one for this NUC and one for the next NUC. But, the Toshiba-brand hard drive is a dodgy POS so I want to put this very good NUC Hitachi hard drive into the Toshiba, and a new Seagate Hybrid into the NUC, hence the cloning question. I would clone twice:
1) The NUC Hitachi drive into the new Seagate and continue its use until i install 8.1 into the NUC later.
2) Then the Toshiba 8.1 drive to the Hitachi and install that into the Toshiba.
Do you see any issues here?
Thank you in advance.
1 of 1 people found this helpful
While there is that warning in the instructions regarding the USB 3.0 driver, I have installed this package many, many times and I have never seen that issue occur (a re-enumeration of all USB devices will occur during/following the installation and the keyboard and mouse will not respond during this re-enumeration, but this is only for a very short period of time (say, 20 seconds max)).
That warning is there for people who have been able to install Windows 7 without having to insert the USB 3.0 driver into the installation image. If a PC has true USB 2.0 ports, Windows 7 is going to be able to install without this driver being (already) present. Unfortunately, since the NUCs has no USB 2.0 ports (that aren't also behind a USB 3.0 hub), the USB 3.0 driver is needed ahead of time in order to complete the install. This means that the USB 3.0 driver is already present when you are installing this driver package and thus this warning does not apply. You might ask why you need to install the driver package if the driver is already present. This is to ensure that, if an updated versions of the package (say, one containing a bug fix) is released via Windows Update, the package will be seen and the update installed (there have actually never been any such bug fix updates, however; the only updates to the package so far have been to add support for newer generations of the chipset and their (slightly different) USB 3.0 controllers).
(Just as an FYI) If you boot Windows and then install a device driver package, the configuration that existed when you booted will have been backed up (saved) as the Last Known Good configuration and a new configuration (containing this driver package) will be in front of it. So yes, even though you just installed Windows 7, there will be a Last Known Good configuration to fall back onto.
All of this talk about USB 3.0 refers to the Windows environment. It has no bearing on the BIOS. When the BIOS is active (i.e. during the Power-On Self-Test (POST) phase), it will (separately) initialize the USB interfaces and manage the devices connected to these interfaces. So, if you had seen the issue where the keyboard and mouse disappeared in the Windows environment, they would be working in the (subsequent) BIOS environment.
So, all concerns aside, whether they currently seem to be working fine or not, make sure you install the latest USB 3.0 package.
If you have XHCI disabled in the BIOS, you are essentially running your USB 3.0 ports in USB 2.0 mode and thus losing all that extra performance than USB 3.0 can give you. Unless you have a device with a compatibility issue, I would have XHCI enabled.
In my NUCs, I always install M.2 NVMe/SATA SSDs (and, in the older WY (etc.) NUCs, (M.1) mSATA SSDs) for performance and then a HDD or a SSHD for (big) data storage. If I can find the SSHDs for a price fairly close to the HDDs, I choose the SSHDs every time. In fact, by watching closely and timing my purchases right, I have been able to somewhat regularly get SSHDs for the same price as equivalent size HDDs.
My final thoughts: Windows 10 is an improved version of Windows 8.1. If you don't like Windows 10, I don't see how you are going to like Windows 8.1. It has all of the same bloat and Microsoft spyware as Windows 10; you can't get away from it. I will stick with Windows 7 as long as I can. Unfortunately, since Microsoft forced Intel to specifically NOT support anything but Windows 10 on Kaby Lake and all future processors, this won't be long. On those systems where I am forced to run Windows 10 (I will NOT run Windows 8.1, period), I uninstall all Metro applications (and things like OneDrive) that I can. I will not install anything via the Microsoft app store. I login using only local accounts. I will not use Edge (well, it won't work properly with local Administrator accounts anyway) and I avoid Internet Explorer whenever I can.
Hope this helps,
Scott, great post, esp the 4th paragraph which is the most concise i've ever read on the topic. Ok, all is understood now.
I agree very much on the last paragraph, I think people are basically having the same experiences which is coming out in common opinions.
Let me digress a moment about OSs. A friend always says that nothing good has come out of MS since Windows 95 and I get the point. I have a Toshiba laptop, now about 12 years old and running XP. Just a few minor problems, still going strong. I have a Toshiba laptop, now about 8 years old and running Vista. This package is becoming the most solid tech i'd ever had, no problems, not even minor, not even re-install of Windows or anything. Whatever problems I ever had started with 7 and Ive had plenty, whether its printer, scanner, the OS balkiness. I never know one day to the next if it will even turn on at all. Win 7 is a malcontented miscreant, it hates life! Win 8.1 on the newest Toshiba laptop, once the user ditches the tiles and uses the normal desktop and Classic Shell for menus, is OK. Much spying can be turned off and the startup is fast even with a HDD. Im confused and unhappy about the structure of file indexing (i truly dont get it and need help) but otherwise really its not bad. Im not sure if its a dressed-up 7 or precursor to 10 but its pretty solid. Its 7 that is always lurking in the shadows waiting to pop right through the screen and punch me in the face just for sitting in front of it. Win 10....i refuse...i'll leave computing and go back to rock and chisel if/when 10 becomes the only choice. I wont say more about 10.
I'll continue. I bought 8.1 (which is rapidly drying up as a purchaseable OS) as the alternative to 10 when 7 is gone, simple as that. I'll stay on 7 as long as possible. What I could do is install 8.1 on the coming Seagate SSHD and leave this drive alone and intact as a backup system. At some point when im braver i'll start using the SSD ability of NUC and leave a 2.5 inch as the data collector. I want to see a stream of user's good luck with Samsung 850s and 950s first.
Its true what you said about prices. I was searching for an HDD and lo and behold there is the Seagate Hybrid for nearly the same price so i'll take it. Its not even 5% difference.
Ok, when I get off i'll install the 3.0 driver. YES, I turned off xHCI because Intel wrote to me and told me to do it but I'll change that back when I install the driver. Can you answer one thing? What is the nature of the compatibility issue between external hardware devices and 3.0? On other PCs which have 3.0 ports, I frequently have troubles in which the external device are unstable or wont always function which causes me to avoid the port and use the remaining 2.0 ports--even if said devices claimed to be 3.0 ready. Whats going on?
Thank you very much to N. Scott Pearson for the information posted previously.
It is great to hear the information above was useful for you.
In regard to your inquiry, there are several elements that can be related to this matter, a driver update, BIOS or firmware update might be needed for the USB 3.0 devices to work properly, Also there is a possibility that one of these can be corrupted. Besides that, this problem could be related to hardware too, the USB ports not working, the USB cable, hard drive compatibility, the NUC itself or maybe a driver package missing.
On the following link you will find the tested peripherals for the NUC, in there you will find USB 3.0 products that were tested by Intel with the NUC and that are fully compatible:
Also, we recommend to install the latest driver version for chipset, management engine and USB 3.0:
Once you installed this driver you can get in the BIOS and enable xHCI in order to use the USB ports at 3.0.
Any further questions, please let us know.
The problem with USB 3.0 is simple,
- Even though it is a wired technology, it utilizes the same 2.4GHz frequency range that most wireless technologies - WiFi, Bluetooth, phones, cameras, mice, keyboards, etc. and etc. - also utilize.
- Most of the USB 3.0 cables out there are not well shielded against interference. You get what you pay for and most folks don't seem willing to pay what they should.
Thanks for both replies and links!
Does it do any good to ask why the USB developers didnt change to a non-conflicting frequency when they must have known during development that conflicts with other 2.4ghz devices were going to exist?
I had no idea about differences in cables or even that shielded cables were marketed. Is there any method that people use to shield existing cables at least as a trial?
Well, I wasn't part of the WG, so I am not sure. I might speculate that this was because Wireless USB was supposed to be part of the USB 3.0 specification and this (call it a commonality?) might have pushed them to the 2.4GHz band. This might be ironic, since I heard that they were never able to satisfactorily address the Wake-On-Wireless issue and, as a result, dropped Wireless USB from the USB 3.0 specification completely (in order to get the specification released on schedule).
Being a Software Engineer and not an Electrical Engineer, I cannot adequately answer the cable question. Perhaps there's an EE who can chime in with a good answer. My facetious input is that, when comparing two cables, the thicker one likely has the better shielding...
Thank you very much to N. Scott Pearson once again for the details posted previously.
I hope the information above was useful for you, and I also encourage all the peers in our communities to add comments if they have further information about this matter.
Any questions, please let me know.
You have me curious now, i'll search around about shielding as a general issue and see what people are doing. I had no idea at all that cabling would have an effect on this, and i never knew that wireless-USB was even on the horizon in someones dreams. I think most people know by now that 2.4 cordless phones create problems in a wifi environment and as much as I loathe cables they work better. Example, a LAN cable will provide greater speed than wifi. But then we never stop to think that waves emanating from cables effect each other which gives rise to the belief that shielding is needed for ALL cables. Given the low prices of many devices it makes sense the MFRs wouldnt provide the best cables. Right.....who wants to spend $20 for a device and another $20 for a proper cable? So we need a home fix that can be applied to all. (Why do i feel that what im saying is seriously behind the times?) I cant post pics in here but there is at least one company making shielded cabling and the thicker material isnt the insulation that you see, its layers of shielding material inside, even three layers of different materials and I cannot remember for what application they were even for--space shuttle wiring?? Dont know. Hmm.
Thank you very much for sharing those comments in our community, we really appreciate you took the time to post it on this thread.
I am sure that if any of the peers viewing this thread have the option to confirm or suggest a home fix for this problem they will provide all the details about how to do that.
Any questions, please let me know.
Additionally to the comments on this thread, on the following link you will find further information about the USB 3.0 Radio Frequency Interference on 2.4 GHz Devices:
Any questions, please let me know.
First of all, when you installed Windows 7, did you use an installation image that already had USB 3.0 drivers added to it? If so, you don't absolutely need to have the package installed, so if nothing we try gets the installer to work, you should still be ok.
Second, while I am guessing that you did, I cannot tell for sure whether the folder containing the driver package was on the SSD/HDD/SSHD or on a USB device. It cannot be run from a USB device; you must copy it to the SSD/HDD/SSHD before running the installer.
Third, while they haven't provided updates you could also attempt to use a later version of the package. You could, for example, try this one: Download Intel® USB 3.0 Device Driver for Windows 7* for Intel® NUC Kit NUC6i[X]SY. Yes, it says it's for a later NUC, but I have used this version on both MY and RY NUCs successfully.
Hope this helps,