Disk Perf
Hardware, posted: 29-Nov-2009 03:21
SSDs are moving more towards mainstream as their price point comes down and their size increases.
I've been keen on the technology from it's inception, but as yet, haven't laid out the cash.
Other people I know have and I'm posting these shots of their disk performance.
These are from non-lab-condition tests, so it's a range of OS, and I can't vouch for what was running in the background.
[below] 3.5" 250GB, 7.2K, WD desktop disk. A pretty standard set of specs for most computers. Win XP
[below] 3.5" 1.0TB, 7.2K, WD Caviar Green. Running in RAID 1, mirroring. Win 7 x64
[below] 3.5" 1.5TB, 7.2K, WD Caviar Green. Win 7 x64
[below] 2.5" 150GB, 10K, Velociraptor, Win XP
[below] 2.5" 300GB, 10K, Velociraptor, Win 7 x64
[below] 2.5", 120GB, SSD, MLC, OCZ Vertex, Win 7 x64
[below] 2.5", 160GB, SSD, Intel X25G2 (pre firmware fiasco), Vista
So there you have it. Some reference points for getting an idea about what performance you MIGHT get.
I've been keen on the technology from it's inception, but as yet, haven't laid out the cash.
Other people I know have and I'm posting these shots of their disk performance.
These are from non-lab-condition tests, so it's a range of OS, and I can't vouch for what was running in the background.
[below] 3.5" 250GB, 7.2K, WD desktop disk. A pretty standard set of specs for most computers. Win XP
[below] 3.5" 1.0TB, 7.2K, WD Caviar Green. Running in RAID 1, mirroring. Win 7 x64
[below] 3.5" 1.5TB, 7.2K, WD Caviar Green. Win 7 x64
[below] 2.5" 150GB, 10K, Velociraptor, Win XP
[below] 2.5" 300GB, 10K, Velociraptor, Win 7 x64
[below] 2.5", 120GB, SSD, MLC, OCZ Vertex, Win 7 x64
[below] 2.5", 160GB, SSD, Intel X25G2 (pre firmware fiasco), Vista
So there you have it. Some reference points for getting an idea about what performance you MIGHT get.
Permalink to Disk Perf
| Main Index
