Forum Read-Only

Winter · #1 March 28, 2010, 02:50:26 PM

While they are still a relatively new and expensive technology, Solid state drives or SSDs for short are showing they are the future. While not all SSDs are created equal, Intel's drives are second to none in terms of the booting up of an OS or a specific application. The future only looks brighter as Hard Drives seem to be a thing of the past. SSDs use no moving parts and are based off of flash technology (not Adobe Flash).

More info later.

Jaredvcxz · #2 March 28, 2010, 03:16:56 PM

Simple explanation: Think of a USB drive with hundreds of gigabytes.

I'm really hoping to see these in the market at a reasonable price soon. It'll take my 3 minute vista boot time and turn it into 1 minute... Only because vista sucks at booting. I suppose XP would boot in a matter of seconds.

Winter · #3 March 29, 2010, 10:15:02 AM

It could also be because of your RAM, no?

What are your specs, Jared?

Shadow · #4 March 29, 2010, 10:22:53 AM

To be honest, I never heard of SSDs before.
*Goes to check Google*

Winter · #5 March 29, 2010, 11:09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadow

To be honest, I never heard of SSDs before.
*Goes to check Google*

They are a fairly new technology but they are far better than conventional hard drives in terms of speed and reliability (though not all of them).

Jaredvcxz · #6 March 29, 2010, 04:51:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winter

It could also be because of your RAM, no?

What are your specs, Jared?

Only 1 gb of ram.

Shadow: They've actually been around for about a year, just not popular yet.

FreezeWarp · #7 March 29, 2010, 04:57:23 PM

In Ubuntu 10.04 you can boot to an SSD in under 10 seconds. Actually, on my HDD, its only about 8 seconds, so I'd imagine about a 5 second boost on equivalent hardware (that is, Intel Atom Processor, Acer Aspire One Netbook, 1GB RAM).

...Which makes sense, since Ubuntu only requires 386MB of RAM.

Winter · #8 March 30, 2010, 05:28:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FreezeWarp

In Ubuntu 10.04 you can boot to an SSD in under 10 seconds. Actually, on my HDD, its only about 8 seconds, so I'd imagine about a 5 second boost on equivalent hardware (that is, Intel Atom Processor, Acer Aspire One Netbook, 1GB RAM).

...Which makes sense, since Ubuntu only requires 386MB of RAM.

One of these days I will get used to Linux but since it cannot play PC games on its own, it is on the back burner.

I learned most of what I know on MacRumors where people show OS X booting up in 15 seconds including apps.

FreezeWarp · #9 March 31, 2010, 05:31:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winter

One of these days I will get used to Linux but since it cannot play PC games on its own, it is on the back burner.

I learned most of what I know on MacRumors where people show OS X booting up in 15 seconds including apps.

Yeah, my netbook is currently dual-booted XP/Linux. But, thats easier to do on an HDD than on a much smaller SDD.

Flareon · #10 April 17, 2010, 08:18:19 PM

Night and day difference to the traditional hard drive, if compared one on one. (Ignore RAID setups.) The traditional drive, filled with moving platters, will always take time to spin around and find the data in question that it needs. SSD's, being flash, can find whatever they need, instantaneously. No wait, no delay, other then the usual bottlenecks. It's great! Just expensive as hell, and has a short lifespan.

Buoysel · #11 July 4, 2010, 05:36:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flareon

Night and day difference to the traditional hard drive, if compared one on one. (Ignore RAID setups.) The traditional drive, filled with moving platters, will always take time to spin around and find the data in question that it needs. SSD's, being flash, can find whatever they need, instantaneously. No wait, no delay, other then the usual bottlenecks. It's great! Just expensive as hell, and has a short lifespan.

Short Life span? I though SSDs where supposed to be more reliable than HDDs?

I know that SSD's survive impacts better, but life span? How so?

FreezeWarp · #12 July 4, 2010, 11:08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buoysel

Short Life span? I though SSDs where supposed to be more reliable than HDDs?

I know that SSD's survive impacts better, but life span? How so?

Flash media degrades over time, so they usually last a lot less than hard drives. But for most people the 3-5 years they do last is enough.

Buoysel · #13 July 5, 2010, 07:37:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FreezeWarp

Flash media degrades over time, so they usually last a lot less than hard drives. But for most people the 3-5 years they do last is enough.

3-5 years, thats loner than any regular HDD has lasted for me.

First Notebook was a Dell Insprion B130, HDD lasted 2 months, replaced again @ 8 months, replaced the computer @13 months. Current laptop is an Acer Aspire 5315, first HDD lasted 6 months, current HDD has lasted 1.2 years.

I'm looking for a better solution. I don't have good luck when it comes to computer hardware. Besides, in 3-5 years, a Computer is going to be so obsolete that it won't really matter.

Flareon · #14 July 9, 2010, 03:11:29 PM

You can pretty accurately predict the death of flash media, like an SSD. A HDD can go on for yeeeeeears under load without fault. There are plenty still chugging from the 1990's.

Winter · #15 July 20, 2010, 04:52:33 PM

Although I would make an argument that today's HDDs are not built like the ones from the 1990s. SSDs are a new technology and are vastly improving. That isn't to say that they are vastly better since you can get a 1 TB HDD at 7,200 RPM for a fraction of the cost of a 100 GB SSD.