> > - Much of the real world speedup from SSD is due to the extremely low > > latency random access (compared to disks), not increased peak bandwidth. > > I know. So an increased bandwith will give even more smoothness on the > desktop.
I think you've missed the point. Most of the slowness of disks is due to access latencies (ie. the time it takes for the disk to rotate round to the correct position), not the speed at which they can stream data off the disk. I expect that SATA based SSD are sufficiently fast that most tasks are no longer limited by the time it takes to get the data off the disk. Say booting your OS and loading all your applications needs to load 1Gb of data from disk (I'd bet for most systems it's significantly less than this). That's less than 4 seconds over a SATA2 link, which is a small fraction of the total time taken. The only time more bandwidth really helps is when you're dealing with a *lot* of data. e.g. video editing. For these tasks you probably also need to store more than a few Gb of data. > I don't understand why there is no chipset to connect few GB > on them. There is. It's called a SATA host controller, and pretty much every motherboard sold in the last 3 years has at least one. A PCIe x1 card is pointless, it doesn't go any faster than SATA/SAS. There's no point inventing something new when existing infrastructure already does it just as well. PCIe is only really useful if you use a PCIe x4 card with sufficiently many flash chips to saturate that interface (It's going to need a lot). At this point you're into specialist high-end systems way beyond the desktop market. Paul _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
