Researchers Discover Way to Extend HDD Storage 5X

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
See. I still can't justify an SSD. My PC boots up in 40 seconds, and my games load in 5 seconds. Why do I need more than that now?

I will get an SSD when 1 TB is $100. But by then I would probably require at least 2 TB...
 
Vapor until applied. This is nice to know but completely meaningless until it gets to market. Thanks for the nothing news.
 
[citation][nom]CaptainTom[/nom]See. I still can't justify an SSD. My PC boots up in 40 seconds, and my games load in 5 seconds. Why do I need more than that now? I will get an SSD when 1 TB is $100. But by then I would probably require at least 2 TB...[/citation]

See. I still can't justify getting a quadcore. My PC still gets decent frame-rates on a P4 clocked at 2.0 GHz.
 
[citation][nom]CaptainTom[/nom]See. I still can't justify an SSD. My PC boots up in 40 seconds, and my games load in 5 seconds. Why do I need more than that now?...[/citation]

Depends on what you do. If you work all day on a PC these saved seconds add up.
Kinda like going from a 4cyl to a 6 cylinder engine. Once you drove one you do not want to go back; even if you drive only the speed limit.


 
[citation][nom]CaptainTom[/nom]See. I still can't justify an SSD. My PC boots up in 40 seconds, and my games load in 5 seconds. Why do I need more than that now? I will get an SSD when 1 TB is $100. But by then I would probably require at least 2 TB...[/citation]
See. I just can't justify upgrading from my old 486. It runs MS Word 97 just fine.

Face it, you need an SSD. Anything less than instant is not good enough. Or at least that will be the case within a few years.
 
[citation][nom]CaptainTom[/nom]See. I still can't justify an SSD. My PC boots up in 40 seconds, and my games load in 5 seconds. Why do I need more than that now? I will get an SSD when 1 TB is $100. But by then I would probably require at least 2 TB...[/citation]

Try installing 50 Windows updates, copying 100GB of data of small files to your drive, installing a new version of Matlab, running a virus scan or running bittorrent on a 100Mb/s internet connection while playing games.

Let me know how long it takes you/how smoothly it runs. Or run out of memory and watch you pitiful 1TB hard drive grind away while your computer is unusable. SSDs crunch through low memory situations pretty well. They kick butt and they can handle 100s of Terabytes of writes.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?271063-SSD-Write-Endurance-25nm-Vs-34nm/page208&post#5182

And my 4 year old Core 2 Duo (3GHZ) laptop with a 3 year old SSD boots up in 18 seconds, 8 seconds if you start after POST. http://youtu.be/lyTJ-4dEqsY

I have a second internal laptop drive for storage.
 
[citation][nom]freggo[/nom]Depends on what you do. If you work all day on a PC these saved seconds add up.Kinda like going from a 4cyl to a 6 cylinder engine. Once you drove one you do not want to go back; even if you drive only the speed limit.[/citation]

See. I still can't justify getting a 6 cylinder engine. My 4 cylinder is still quicker and more fuel efficient than most bigger engines. Turbos are like hyperthreading for cars.
 
[citation][nom]afrobacon[/nom]See. I still can't justify getting a 6 cylinder engine. My 4 cylinder is still quicker and more fuel efficient than most bigger engines. Turbos are like hyperthreading for cars.[/citation]

See. I still can't justify using air service to transport extremely perishable products. Shipping them over water is acceptable, even if my factory's production grinds to a halt while waiting for such products.
 
Needs to be a much easier and robust method of transferring the system to the SSD 1st, then I'll add one......
 
[citation][nom]jfro63[/nom]Needs to be a much easier and robust method of transferring the system to the SSD 1st, then I'll add one......[/citation]
....Norton Ghost, yo.
 
[citation][nom]JOSHSKORN[/nom]Great, now cut the price of SSDs in 1/5th. Now, that'd be news![/citation]

Check back in five years. It's like holding off on upgrading your computer since 2007 because you're waiting for DDR3 RAM's prices to go down.

[citation][nom]SteelCity1981[/nom]how about instead of prolonging HDD's life find better methods to store a large amount of infomation on an SSD to make SSD's more affordable.[/citation]

Because for some tasks, cheap capacity is more important than speed.
 


How? LOL not exactly the same thing. When did I say they are a terrible purchase? I just don't think they are worth it on a desktop yet when you are on a budget.

To everyone else:

-I would certainly get one in my next laptop (Where speed and power use really matter)
-If it is for a job that directly translates into money, then yeah it is worth it.
-I use MATLAB, and often have tons of files opened and transferring at once. It takes one second to open word. Maybe some of you should take better care of your HDD's.
-SSD's ARE superior to HDD's. I never said they weren't. But they don't hold enough data yet. I don't want 5 drives...


I wasn't trolling lol. Calm down people...
 
This is good. While I love the performance gains that I get from having my OS on an SSD, the capacity still isn't there for me to use just SSDs. As a PC gamer, I've got well more than 300GB of program data that simply cannot fit on solid state drives without spending a fortune. Add to that the fact that I constantly record playthroughs and demos with FRAPS and even my 2TB drive can fill up easily. Until solid state drives are priced cheaper than HDDs, they will still have a use.
 



Nobody is doing that. Right now SSD's cost more, hold FARRRRR less data, and would require a lot of file transferring (A huge headache). In 1-2 years they will probably hold triple the info and cost a fourth of the price. Then they will be worth it to SWITCH. If I was building brand new in a few months I would probably get one though, but I am not and I am content with what I have. I am glad you are too.
 
[citation][nom]danwat1234[/nom]Try installing 50 Windows updates, copying 100GB of data of small files to your drive, installing a new version of Matlab, running a virus scan or running bittorrent on a 100Mb/s internet connection while playing games. Let me know how long it takes you/how smoothly it runs. Or run out of memory and watch you pitiful 1TB hard drive grind away while your computer is unusable. SSDs crunch through low memory situations pretty well. They kick butt and they can handle 100s of Terabytes of writes.http://www.xtremesystems.org/forum [...] &post#5182And my 4 year old Core 2 Duo (3GHZ) laptop with a 3 year old SSD boots up in 18 seconds, 8 seconds if you start after POST. http://youtu.be/lyTJ-4dEqsYI have a second internal laptop drive for storage.[/citation]
Do you have quick boot on? If so, that is just hibernate. Either way. Even my rather old 64 gigabyte SSD does make Win8 fly too.

I do not think I would build a system without an SSD anymore either, but storage will fall to hard drives for quite a while to come.
 
Yes, quick boot. It's semi-hibernate. Regular full boot takes about 5 seconds longer. It helps mechanical drives more than SSDs, reduces the number of head movements. The only benefit to SSDs is less time to activate the drivers, less negotiation. I don't know the details.
 
[citation][nom]CaptainTom[/nom]How? LOL not exactly the same thing. When did I say they are a terrible purchase? I just don't think they are worth it on a desktop yet when you are on a budget. *snip* Calm down people...[/citation]

Well....... I think the way you typed it is what gave that impression to some people.

Mainly because you started off with "See. I still can't justify", it set the mood for the rest of your comment to making you sound like or the item your talking about is better/Superior (or something to that effect).

Yes, you didn't say that SSD are bad for normal people or anything in that nature when you read it word for word but most people tend to read it as if there person talking to them.

So you have to factor that what ever your typing in has to sound like how you would say it.
 
If your budget doesn't allow for both an SSD AND a hard disk, then going for the latter is reasonable. However using both hard disks and an SSD gives you the best of both worlds.
 
That's very nice. My desktop machine has both SSDs and magnetic, and I like both. Not all files benefit from SSDs, and for bulk storage, SSDs have a ways to go. However, magnetic has to stay ahead, otherwise, there's no reason to stay with it.

That being said, I would love a 20 TB HDD, even though I have trouble filling up 6 TB
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom