11–20 of 123 posts
Linus' recommendation to buy the Intel X25-M still stands, because they have the fastest small-block random I/O performance. Why would you buy an SSD only to do large sequential transfers with it? Just use a 1.5TB HDD to store your media files.
See (http://blog.gtuhl.com/2009/03/26/ocz-vertex-ssd-in-a-17-sant...) for install and before/after xbench runs.
Linus' recommendation to buy the Intel X25-M still stands, because they have the fastest small-block random I/O performance. Why would you buy an SSD only to do large sequential transfers with it? Just use a 1.5TB HDD to store your media files.
Why would your transfers have to be sequential?
However, if you need a large hard drive for a database and not as a media storage, obviously random access is just as important as sequential access.
Jeff Atwood is wrong on the internet... again! Tell me you're surprised. There are too many mistakes in the post to bother correcting. Just read the anandtech.com article if you want accurate info. For accurate price info you should know that the second generation 160 GB X-25Ms originally listed for $450 but shot up in price due to excessive demand. It's only in stock at stores that price gouge and MIA everywhere els…
I'm using one of the 120GB Samsung SSDs that Apple ships stock in the MacBook Pro. It's definitely faster for things like program startup, etc. (many things start in less than one dock "bounce"), but otherwise not so clear. Sure wish Apple would ship the Intel drives. Perhaps they can't get a low enough price on them. Or, alternately, that Samsung would get with the program and do the kind of controller work required…
The first generation of the Intel SSD's contained halogens so Apple couldn't use them. The new ones are halogen-free, so it might be they show up in future revisions of the MBP.
I signed up for a newegg.com alert and immediately purchased a 160GB X-25M g2 for ~$450 minutes after they announced they had stock. I put it in a late 2006 mac mini (1.8GHz Intel Core 1 duo) and it has transformed the feel of the computer. There are far fewer pauses. Big apps launch instantly. Extremely satisfying. The only problem is that it started reporting S.M.A.R.T. errors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would your transfers have to be sequential?
If you only access large media files (due to the very nature of media files, you want to read them sequentially from the beginning to the end) and your hard drive is not too fragmented, it is a reasonable assumption that you will mostly access the hard drive sequentially. However, if you need a large hard drive for a database and not as a media storage, obviously random access is just as important as sequential acces…
Jeff Atwood is wrong on the internet... again! Tell me you're surprised. There are too many mistakes in the post to bother correcting. Just read the anandtech.com article if you want accurate info. For accurate price info you should know that the second generation 160 GB X-25Ms originally listed for $450 but shot up in price due to excessive demand. It's only in stock at stores that price gouge and MIA everywhere els…
For those of us not as current on SSDs as you are, actually correcting his mistakes might be useful.
I'm using one of the 120GB Samsung SSDs that Apple ships stock in the MacBook Pro. It's definitely faster for things like program startup, etc. (many things start in less than one dock "bounce"), but otherwise not so clear. Sure wish Apple would ship the Intel drives. Perhaps they can't get a low enough price on them. Or, alternately, that Samsung would get with the program and do the kind of controller work required…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you only access large media files (due to the very nature of media files, you want to read them sequentially from the beginning to the end) and your hard drive is not too fragmented, it is a reasonable assumption that you will mostly access the hard drive sequentially. However, if you need a large hard drive for a database and not as a media storage, obviously random access is just as important as sequential acces…
What about reading several large media files concurrently?