Is an SSD faster than a standard rotationg SATA ?
The jargon is hard to get past. I get the impression that
the SSD is just small and low power, rather than fast.

johns

On Sep 26, 6:14*pm, johns <johns...@moscow.com> wrote:
> Is an SSD faster than a standard rotationg SATA ?
> The jargon is hard to get past. I get the impression that
> the SSD is just small and low power, rather than fast.
>
> johns

SSD read speed is faster than rotating SATA, SSD write speed is about
the same, b/c on write SSD 1st has to erace then write.

Primary benefits of SSD are:
1) Vibration insensitive. You can use tem to record data on
helicopters, cars etc.
2) lower heat generation than rotating.
3) faster read speed.

in about all other respects SSD is not whole lot better than standard
rotating.

The really high quality SSDs that totaly kick butt of rotating are
custom build and cost about $1k per GB of storage.

johns wrote:
> Is an SSD faster than a standard rotationg SATA ?
> The jargon is hard to get past. I get the impression that
> the SSD is just small and low power, rather than fast.
>
> johns

Lower seek time.

1) USB flash is around 1msec seek time, due to the protocol.
2) SATA flash is around 0.1msec seek time.

The ability to do random access, without head movement,
is an asset.

The trick would be finding a controller for the devices,
that caches writes until enough are available to write
efficiently to the flash. AFAIK, writing small quantities
of data, involves read-modify-write operations, whereas
writing at the natural block size would avoid that overhead.

http://mtron.easyco.com/news/papers/...benchmarks.pdf

There is also a good deal of variation, between brands
and implementations. Some flash devices are an insult
to the concept, and if purchased, will give you the wrong
impression.

It's more of a "wait and see" technology right now.

An SSD based on DRAM, doesn't have an issue with writes -
if you can afford it.

Paul

johns wrote:
> Is an SSD faster than a standard rotationg SATA ?
> The jargon is hard to get past. I get the impression that
> the SSD is just small and low power, rather than fast.
>
> johns

It all depends on the SSD. There are a few different types and a wide
range of performance.

Ari

--
spammage trappage: remove the underscores to reply
Many people around the world are waiting for a marrow transplant. Please
volunteer to be a marrow donor and literally save someone's life:
http://www.abmdr.org.au/
http://www.marrow.org/

In article <29d408aa-01e7-4d81-9c44-
(E-Mail Removed)>, johns says...
> Is an SSD faster than a standard rotationg SATA ?
> The jargon is hard to get past. I get the impression that
> the SSD is just small and low power, rather than fast.
>
Some are faster whilst others are slower. The "mechanical" HDD brigade
have upped their game though.

Power wise, there's not a lot in it.

I'd wait another 6 months as it's a new technology and improvements are
being made all the time.

--
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't
looking good either. - Scott Adams

"Conor" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote...
>> Is an SSD faster than a standard rotationg SATA ?
>> The jargon is hard to get past. I get the impression that
>> the SSD is just small and low power, rather than fast.
>>
> Some are faster whilst others are slower. The "mechanical" HDD brigade
> have upped their game though.
>
> Power wise, there's not a lot in it.
>
> I'd wait another 6 months as it's a new technology and improvements are
> being made all the time.

Maximum PC magazine just did a review of several SSDs. The short version
is that there are 2 major versions right now: SLD and MLD (Single- and
Multi-Level Device) flash RAM chips. The SLD are "good" and the MLD are
"cheaper." The cheaper MLD devices are WAY too slow on writes to replace a
"performance" HDD. The SLD devices are comparable in performance to HDDs,
but $800+ for the current 64 GB variety.