As someone else noted, the Intel X-25E performance is much higher than the averages you posted below. (Approx. 250MB/s reads, 200MB/s writes, and latency around 1/2 of what you had there, I believe*.) So, yes, if you buy the "good stuff", it blows normal disks out of the water.
Nicholas * - http://techreport.com/articles.x/15931 On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 2:28 AM, Edward Ned Harvey <[email protected]>wrote: > Today I poked around looking at specs of SSD’s and 7.2krpm SATA hard > disks. I just sampled a bunch of whitepapers on various drives and averaged > the results together. Also, when there wasn’t an apples-to-apples > measurement to compare, I had to calculate, as evidenced by the IOPS versus > avg seek time. > > > > The comparisons were pretty surprising, to me – > > > > Sustainable reads: SSD somewhat faster (avg 199MB/s compared to avg 126 > MB/s) > > Sustainable writes: SSD equal to SATA (avg 124MB/s compared to avg 126 > MB/s) > > MTBF: SSD equal to SATA. 1.17 vs 1.20 million hours > > Read latency: SSD way faster (0.16ms vs 8.5ms) (which I derived from 6300 > IOPS and 8.5ms avg seek time) > > Write latency: SSD somewhat slower (12ms vs 8.5ms) (which I derived from > 84 IOPS and 8.5ms avg seek time) > > > > Actually, I’m not sure how fair the MTBF is. Because a SATA drive will > eventually fail just from being powered on, while the life of a SSD is > basically determined by how much you write to it. > > _______________________________________________ > Tech mailing list > [email protected] > http://lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech > This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators > http://lopsa.org/ > >
_______________________________________________ Tech mailing list [email protected] http://lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
