Slashdot Mirror
Why Size Matters For Your SSD Purchase
Vigile writes "Performance analysis on solid state drives is still coming into clarity as more manufacturers enter the fold and more of the drives find their way into users' hands. While Intel's dominance in the SSD market was once undoubted, newer garbage collection methods from Indilinx and Samsung are now balancing performance across the the major players. What hasn't been discussed in great detail yet is the effect that drive capacity can have on overall performance. Some smaller drives (64GB versus 128GB) will actually use fewer data channels from the controller chip and thus will have lower transfer speeds. The article compares drives using controllers from Indilinx, Samsung and Intel." Note that PCPer greedily spans this review over 12 pages. Next time maybe they can keep it down to something more reasonable.
6.40 inches ought to be enough for anybody.
Intel X25-M 160GB totally dominates in IOPS and doesn't suffer in the other categories. A clean win.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
The odds of me reading page 2 of any article not paginated sensibly (reading a single page should take several minutes) are probably around 10%. Page 5? never.
I'll just be uninformed until information is published with a sensible pagination system. I'm okay with that.
paul reinheimer
They're not going to be more reasonable until we take a stand. Vote down the story, and make sure not to click the links.
I have never bothered with firmware updates and additional configuration steps with standard IDE, SATA, SCSI, and SAS drives. While looking around at various SSD, I found that you need to go though all of this additional crap to get things working right. OCZ, for example, has a whole forum dedicated to help tweak out their drives. http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=186
From the article:
I was going to include a price comparison, but a few of the units tested (like the Corsair P64) don't seem to be carried anywhere as of yet. That said, prices generally do not sway far from the cost/GB of ~$2.75 set by Intel when they released their G2 drives at record low prices. The exception here is the SLC-based PhotoFast V4S, which will retail for a whopping $499 (that's $15/GB in case you ran out of fingers and toes).
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Um ... why would they do that if their 12-page version gets slashdotted anyway? The whole point of the splitting it up is to get page views.
How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
Each page was was broken at logical point too. Sure, they could have done the same in 6 pages that didn't have logical breaks, but you know, some people think that everything should be on one long page. Yay for them.
Is it too hard to click "next" ???? REALLY???
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Actually, fewer pages with more text content delivered per http request would reduce the load on the server. The bigger impact on the server is repeated visits to the hard drive and trips to the database. When one article requires 12 separate page requests, that cranks up the number of http requests coming in that have to be responded to with hard drive file reads and database queries.
Not knowing their specific server architecture, the above is a generalization. Caching, virtual memory mapped file systems, etc. can alleviate these bottlenecks.
Seth
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
I use adblock primarily for these sites.
Then you're doing it wrong! The plugin you want for 12-page reviews is AutoPager. It works like the /. home page, loading 'next' pages as you get near the bottom. It's even smart enough to strip off headers and footers.
That's why I boycott books. I mean the scroll format was obviously much better. Turning pages wastes time and saliva, plus there is the mortal danger of paper cuts. Until books and magazines come in a sensible scroll format I won't be buying either.
Slightly off topic, but it's often forgotten that the filesystem also plays an important role in drive performance. Newer filesystems like NILFS (http://www.linux-mag.com/cache/7345/1.html) are created to suit SSD's instead of the legacy rotating media. It claims to hold the same performance, no matter how large the filesystem is.
Back on topic: We're seeing the same evolution with SSD's now like we saw it with spinning media several years back, when they started to increase the drive size ever more. Eventually these performance differences between larger and smaller drives will disappear: they will simply not be an issue anymore at all when you won't be able to get SSD's smaller than 200GB, like the similar trend with spinning media.
Back when I was a kid, books used to come in a nice, easily scrollable format. Of course, that was before Gutenburg came along and messed things up with his new-fangled page-at-a-time printing... now get off my lawn!
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
I think that in order to be classified as a Super Star Destroyer, it has to be at least 15km long. Although the salesman will tell you it's worth at least 20 regular Star Destroyers, the price you pay should be no more than the cost of 15 Imperial-class SD's. Also, be on the lookout for used SSDs. They may be infested with Conduit worms, affecting the ability of the SSD to fire its cannons.
Battlemaster--Game with friends in medival realms