| Author |
Message |
Browncoat Member
Joined: 20 Sep 2004 Location: Australia / Newcastle
|
|
Supreme2k Greetings
Joined: 07 Feb 2003 Location: Right Here, Right Now
|
|
Funny thing is that, like all tech, they'll probably have a 6TB drive in a couple of years, and it will be much faster. These guys will look as dated as those of us who tweaked our systems to get 20fps on Doom from our 386s
_________________ Copyright infringement is not theft
|
|
jagabo Member
Joined: 09 Dec 2005 Location: none
|
|
Just what everyone needs, opening everything in the start menu at the same time. Then spending the rest of the day looking for the application you want. What a waste of money.
|
|
Browncoat Member
Joined: 20 Sep 2004 Location: Australia / Newcastle
|
|
Look at it as a demonstration of the technology... you seem so jaded lately jagabo, is everything ok?
|
|
redwudz Mod Neophyte
Joined: 07 Sep 2002 Location: AZ, USA
|
|
I've been very satisfied with my smallish and somewhat slow OCZ 60GB SSD. It does load and run programs quite a bit faster than my SATA drives did. (About twice as fast most times or about 160MB/s+. ) But you really need a 120 - 256GB SSD boot to slow down the RAM wear and spread it throughout the memory chips. And turn off OS defragging as it uses the same memory locations multiple times and can damage the drive. SSDs have their own defragging built in.
I limit writing to the SSD by relocating my page file and other files that the OS wants to write to frequently. I also move program caches and temp files to other mechanical drives. I only see a SSD useful as a boot replacement at present. Still too expensive for regular HDD replacement.
|
|
|
|