The Tom's Hardware article makes very interesting reading. But even more interesting is the followup article referenced at the bottom of the first page.
Seems that there is good reason to think that the first generation SSDs are pretty poor - and only useful for higher performance, and have in general worse power performance, but that this is a result of the use of the first gen support chips, and not inherent to flash. The OCZ flash drive tested in the followup totally wipes the field, close to the top performance, and vastly better power, beating all the other flash and rotating media drives comprehensively. So it seems reasonable to suspect that the second generation of SSDs will make good on the promise. But no doubt, purchasing any of the first gen SSDs would be an unhappy experience.
Umm you may want to partially un-strike the speed benefit. Seek speeds are where SSD's actually have their real speed benefit over traditional HDD's. No head to move so much lower data access latency perfect for lots of small files.
I'm worried about the wear-levelling features that I've heard are now embedded at the flash controller level out of your normal reach. Does that mean that traces of data on a region of flash that has been remapped to spread out the write cycles will remain and be somehow available for forensic examination? Or do the controllers zero out flash after it has been copied and remapped?
the flash drives may wear... but I welcome loosing 10%of a drive thats only 20%full over a total catastrophic failure...
and with the number of 2.5" drives that I have had expire on me due to mecanical breakage it is something i cant wait for :)
the past few months I have been using an 8gb class 6 SDHC (much more basic tech) card in my eeeeepc for main storage and havent noticed any issues, and that card had spent a year in a digital camera before that, some time spent in the central american rainforest then bashed about in the atlantic during a yacht race and it is still going strong!!!
I for one wait for our SSD bearing overlords with open arms! :)
WD My Passport Essential 500GB Portable Hard Drive - Black (USB 2.0)
WD Caviar Black 1TB Hard Drive (Serial ATA-300, 7,200 RPM, 32MB)
WD My Book Essential Edition External 1TB Hard Drive (USB 2.0, 16MB)
Intel X25-M Gen2 160GB 2.5" Solid State Drive (SATA)
WD My Passport Essential Portable 320GB Hard Drive - Black (USB 2.0)
Super Talent delivers SSDs for poor people
Oliver Humpage
Superior battery life? #
Posted Wednesday 1st October 2008 00:11 GMT
*cough* http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-hdd-battery,1955.html *cough*
Oliver.
Pete
superior size? #
Posted Wednesday 1st October 2008 00:11 GMT
> Strike one benefit of using SSDs, but it still leaves superior size, durability, and battery life
OK, can someone please explain to me how a 2.5 inch SSD has "superior size" to a 2.5 inch SATA drive?
Anonymous Coward
Longer lasting? #
Posted Wednesday 1st October 2008 09:33 GMT
They wear out :)
Read / Write cycles.
Francis Vaughan
@Oliver #
Posted Wednesday 1st October 2008 09:56 GMT
The Tom's Hardware article makes very interesting reading. But even more interesting is the followup article referenced at the bottom of the first page.
Seems that there is good reason to think that the first generation SSDs are pretty poor - and only useful for higher performance, and have in general worse power performance, but that this is a result of the use of the first gen support chips, and not inherent to flash. The OCZ flash drive tested in the followup totally wipes the field, close to the top performance, and vastly better power, beating all the other flash and rotating media drives comprehensively. So it seems reasonable to suspect that the second generation of SSDs will make good on the promise. But no doubt, purchasing any of the first gen SSDs would be an unhappy experience.
JonB
@Oliver #
Posted Wednesday 1st October 2008 09:57 GMT
Ok, quieter then!
But so is a brick.
Anonymous Coward
as Oliver said... #
Posted Wednesday 1st October 2008 09:57 GMT
That is all...
Anonymous Coward
seek speed...... #
Posted Wednesday 1st October 2008 11:21 GMT
Umm you may want to partially un-strike the speed benefit. Seek speeds are where SSD's actually have their real speed benefit over traditional HDD's. No head to move so much lower data access latency perfect for lots of small files.
John Benson
question about data traces #
Posted Wednesday 1st October 2008 20:49 GMT
I'm worried about the wear-levelling features that I've heard are now embedded at the flash controller level out of your normal reach. Does that mean that traces of data on a region of flash that has been remapped to spread out the write cycles will remain and be somehow available for forensic examination? Or do the controllers zero out flash after it has been copied and remapped?
Matt
longevity... #
Posted Friday 3rd October 2008 11:26 GMT
the flash drives may wear... but I welcome loosing 10%of a drive thats only 20%full over a total catastrophic failure...
and with the number of 2.5" drives that I have had expire on me due to mecanical breakage it is something i cant wait for :)
the past few months I have been using an 8gb class 6 SDHC (much more basic tech) card in my eeeeepc for main storage and havent noticed any issues, and that card had spent a year in a digital camera before that, some time spent in the central american rainforest then bashed about in the atlantic during a yacht race and it is still going strong!!!
I for one wait for our SSD bearing overlords with open arms! :)