Re: [MLUG] solid state drives

[Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

On Fri, 25 Jul 2008, Jack Smith wrote:

> On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 17:01 -0500, Mike Miller wrote:
>
>> My response:
>>
>>
>> Thanks for sharing that.  That is interesting information. Apparently, 
>> the 4200 RPM HDD took 50% or more time than the SSD on every job but 
>> only 25% longer on "untar kernel," for some reason.
>>
>> On NewEgg.com, most of the 64GB SSD drives are in the $700-$800 range, 
>> but there's this one at $285:
>>
>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820208432
>>
>> So what's wrong with that one?!  ;-)
>>
>> Mike
>
> It's using slower and shorter-lived multi-level cell (MLC) Flash rather 
> than the much more expensive, faster, and longer-lived single-level cell 
> (SLC) Flash. The "-M" at the end of the product name gives it away:
>
> http://www.transcendusa.com/Products/ModDetail.asp?ModNo=177
>
> Transcend's own data lists the MLC version as 116 MB/sec read, 43 MB/sec 
> write vs. 119 MB/sec read, 64 MB/sec writes for the SLC Flash. They do 
> not list the estimated life span in I/O operations for the two types but 
> they do note that the SLC version is recommended for OS installation:
>
> http://www.transcendusa.com/Products/ModDetail.asp?ModNo=177&SpNo=3&LangNo=0
>
> I hope that answers your question.


Yes!  That was a great answer.  So I guess the idea is to use the MLC as a 
second drive for data but the OS does more read/write operations and 
should be on an SLC drive.

I can't wait until those 64GB SLC drives cost $100.  I'll be loving that.

Mike

_______________________________________________
members mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/members