Marshall, don't waste money on SSD (especially not MLC SSD). Get 2 standard HD, put the checkout on the secondary drive, get a dual-cpu quad-core ht with 8+ gigs of RAM (or up to the limit you can afford but get at least 8 gigs of RAM and at least one quad core). Core i7 or xeon nehalem *highly* recommended.
M-A On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 2:21 PM, Jeremy Orlow <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 11:14 AM, Amanda Walker <[email protected]>wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Marshall Greenblatt < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I'm putting together a new computer and I'd like to optimize my chromium >>> build times :-) Is anyone currently building chromium using a solid state >>> drive? Have you noticed any compile or link time speed improvements relative >>> to using a second traditional SATA drive? >>> >> >> Other people can chime in about windows ssd performance, but I have an SSD >> in a Mac laptop that I sometimes do builds on. Total build time is only >> marginally better than a traditional SATA drive (a few percent), but the >> machine is noticeably less sluggish doing other things during a build (when >> there's any disk contention happening, the faster seek time and i/o >> operations per second are a definite win). But for overall build time, I've >> found that RAM and CPU cores make much more of a difference than the drive. >> > > From what I've heard, SVN and searching within a project are faster with a > SSD. As for the system getting sluggish during compile: this can also be > solved by having a 2nd hard drive that contains all the source + build > files. > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
