SSD would have an advantage for random access, but mechanical drives in RAID can easily exceed the sustained throughput, and certainly capacity of a single SSD.
Sorry, I did mean in terms of reads.
Meh... It's 3AM here.
+---------------------+---------------+
| Blocksize | Avg Latency |
+---------------------+---------------+
4 K Seq Read 0.019 ms
Random Read 0.024 ms
Seq Write 0.024 ms
Random Write 0.409 ms
Create scratch file 0.112 ms
8 K Seq Read 0.025 ms
Random Read 0.030 ms
Seq Write 0.033 ms
Random Write 1.044 ms
Create scratch file 0.129 ms
16 K Seq Read 0.040 ms
Random Read 0.039 ms
Seq Write 1.531 ms
Random Write 4.643 ms
Create scratch file 0.055 ms
32 K Seq Read 0.067 ms
Random Read 0.065 ms
Seq Write 2.420 ms
Random Write 4.595 ms
Create scratch file 0.189 ms
64 K Seq Read 0.127 ms
Random Read 0.119 ms
Seq Write 1.603 ms
Random Write 4.974 ms
Create scratch file 0.382 ms
128 K Seq Read 0.251 ms
Random Read 0.235 ms
Seq Write 2.881 ms
Random Write 5.530 ms
Create scratch file 0.699 ms
256 K Seq Read 0.519 ms
Random Read 0.468 ms
Seq Write 6.210 ms
Random Write 8.436 ms
Create scratch file 1.242 ms
+-------------------------------------+I'd rather shell out a little extra for a RAID 01 to keep all my data secure and not have to go out buying an extra drive for backup. (double win!
I guess the feeling is identical to an SSD. I'm not sure what the times are for SSD though and I think different SSDs are very different one from another right?
I can tell you Windows 7 boots hella fast on it. lol.
nuckinfutz said:
These times were from a righteous RAM disk and a 1sec. load time on this system would be impossible no matter what. Unless you mean just to the blue splash screen or something?? That only takes ~1 sec.there is, one from japan
which actually boast a 1TB/sec transfer rate, faster than any SSD sata based configuration.
see links here:
http://vr-zone.com/articles/photofast-g-monster-pcie-ssd-by-mobilemode/6805.html?doc=6805
http://www.tweaktown.com/pressrelea...nster_promise_pci_e_ssd_1000mb_sec/index.html
The larger capacity versions don't suffer quite as badly from the write cycle limitation, as there's more cell for wear leveling usage. Provided it's not full, and the more unused space the better.
Though depending on one's usage patterns, it may not matter that much (read intensive, not write). So I definitely like the performance data I've seen in OS/apps (boot disk), as it's read usage is usually far higher than write. Unfortunately, the smallish capacity and current pricing of SSD makes this hard for some, if not most users.
For now. The current crop of mechanical drives over the last couple of years does seem to have gotten worse, but keep in mind this is mostly consumer models that I've noticed the issues on.
@Tesselator
you can easily Google where the photoshop user files are loaded, I really didn't read it from any site, I just realized it when checking the user files, and I know it is loading from the user profile too., check under /Users
Nearly 400 megabytes of plugins - all of which it initializes during start-up, custom menu initializing which also use folder scanning and plug-ing initializing during startup, etc. etc. there's more. Also this doesn't sound like a fun test. I use PS for work sometimes and need it sitting perfect condition. Raping it doesn't sound like something I personally would be motivated to do.
