The world of drives that is! That's what you'd expect with a large blob of solid state memory mimicking the lumbering HDDs with their rotational latencies and seek time and so on ! That's what many an expert would lead you to believe too. But here are two opinions, actually a hands on test and a studied opinion that says that ain't so!
First, some testing results. Bill O'Brien does some testing and is not impressed at all by the performance to two SSD against two old world hard drives. He took 32 GB drives from Advanced Media Inc and Crucial Technologies .
So drive1 was Crucial's internal 2.5" SSD
drive 2 was RiData's 2.5 " SSD
drive 3 was Seagate's Barracuda 3.5" HDD
drive 4 was Seagate's Momentus 2.5 "
Test results came up as follows.
Dr1 Dr2 Dr3 Dr4
Burst Speed 137.3 71.2 135 214.3 MB/sec
Boot Speed 40 32 40 40 Sec
Restart time 78.6 54.8 59.9 55.6 Sec
Data copying 243 264.5 185 185 Sec*
* for 4666 files totaling 8.05 GB of data, copied to/fro. because at the end of the day the SSD drive data may have to be sync'ed to the main system. Conclusion: no significant gain in any department.
On the other hand the HDD's keep growing in size. 1 TB or a 1000 GB drives are mainstream. That's quite a lead over the SSD's of 60 GB may be! I am sure both are going to be in use for a long time to come!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
It's still early days for SSD. Speeds etc are likely to increase, especially considering how slow HDDs can be as compared to Main Memory. It is more likely that SSDs can get close to matching FSB speeds.
In the event that the speeds do indeed remain slow and comparable to HDDs, there will still be the advantage of there being no moving parts. Anybody who has experienced an HDD crash will stand testimony to that. I think ultimately, all else being equal that's what cuts it in favour of SSDs.
Post a Comment