Just two of the currently available SSD provide not only more throughput than a 10k RPM disk drive, but also negligible latency compared to it - at twice the cost and for a fourth of the storage space. Have a large cheap disk drive for archival, and use a RAID array of SSD for the volume you'll use for the data you are currently working on. This HSM hi/lo combo is certainly the configuration I'll use in the near future. If you have any doubt about why, read this benchmark and you'll understand !
6 Comments
Tell a friend
Bury
6 Comments
Tell a friend
Bury
Like-minded friends share share and discuss their best current news and analysis links here...
Pour Paris, voir
On first try, I scored 14036 at level 9... Perfect while the pasta is...Just finding that it was featured on LWN in November 2009 at En passant, les mémoires, thèses et notes d'alerte de I'm only now discovering that this was on /. a few hours earlier......Il sera en place sur Kivu dès la disponibilité du paquet Debian....And with a thousand views, this is the most read story on this site in...Posted by @skasriel and @inliner...A mon avis, le meilleur choix c'est n'importe quoi qui illustre que la...Pour moi ce fut Logo puis Basic. Mais quand on voit le résultat on se...Human Rights Watch affirms that Guinea forces planned crackdown was...Le plus drôle c'est que cet article fait partie de la revue de presse du...
We are the Grabeuh team and its friends :
Comments
Test of four different SSD (including Intel's one) [fr]
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/731-1/comparatif-ssd-intel-ocz-samsung-supertalent.html
Saw that one - the Intel is impressive, but at constant price it is a better idea to use multiple OCZ in RAID 0. It increasingly looks like disks are going to be relegated to tier 2 storage and heavy streaming applications. Whenever seek times are critical, SSD are a better solution.
However, I am still looking for tests that outline the file size threshold at which disk become more interesting - for now it looks like it is somewhere around four or five MB, which is about the size of a picture. That means that for photo editing on a single storage device, the disk may still be the better choice for the coming year. But multiple SSD with RAID0 are a better choice than multiple disks on RAID0 : they provide only adequate throughput, but the seek times are so low that as soon as there is some multiprocessing going on they should increase their advantage. But I still would like to see some hard numbers...
That said, my reference target application is Bibble 5 - which means that I am going to transition to RAW. A RAW file is bigger (double a JPEG at least) and I am going to have more megapixels to play so I estimate I'll have files between ten and fifteen MB. That sets me back into hard disk territory for the near future.
But Bibble 5 is heavily multithreaded - the demos on the current pre-release version show it taking full advantage of sixteen cores. So seek time may be an issue too...
So I'm not buying anything until I can figure out what should be my primary storage for working files. In addition, SSD are evolving extremely fast and six more months may be a good idea.
Bibble 5 is not out yet and I have not yet bought the camera I'll use to transition to RAW... So I still have plenty of time...
I'm going to go ask for numbers on the Bibble forums...
Got my answer...
http://support.bibblelabs.com/webboard/viewtopic.php?p=53734
I'm guessing that my wrong intuition may be explained by my current disks being so horribly outdated...
The short story is that a single 10kRPM hard disk should be ample for a four cores system.
Performances relative des SSD et disques durs en fonction de la taille des fichiers : http://www.matbe.com/articles/lire/1001/ssd-intel-x25-m-80-go-une-bombe/page10.php
Dommange qu'il n'y ait pas de tests entre 4.47 Go (les HD au coude à coude avec les SSD les plus chers) et 461 Ko (les SSD dominent)... La plage des 4-16 Mo me semble être celle à laquelle j'aimerais que les tests s'intéressent...
Autre news sur le sujet:
http://www.pcinpact.com/actu/news/46034-Super-talent-SSD-sata2.htm