- Jul 3, 2008
- 18
- 0
- 18,510
1. I think it's nuts that SATA is used commonly as the interface for SSDS since (for instance) two raid zero SSDS will vastly eclipse the 600 mb/s R/W transfer rate.
2. Why aren't more SSD vendors making PCI-e interfaced SSDs to harness all the extra bandwidth? Or motherboards with additional PCI-e slots marketed for this purpose?
The pink elephant in the room of everyone's elite PC build is that their 7,200 RPM 2 TB drive *is the bottleneck* on noticeable speed and access of programs, filesystem etc. (at least to me!) I don't understand why the industry for enthusiasts is tied to a now-outdated interface that is bottle-necking bandwidth? Or even more why Tom's hardware wants to argue that SATA 3 speeds and a single SSD are "fast enough" and that RAID-0ing SSDs isn't worth it. It isn't worth it because the interface is crap and makes it not worth it!
/rant
😀
2. Why aren't more SSD vendors making PCI-e interfaced SSDs to harness all the extra bandwidth? Or motherboards with additional PCI-e slots marketed for this purpose?
The pink elephant in the room of everyone's elite PC build is that their 7,200 RPM 2 TB drive *is the bottleneck* on noticeable speed and access of programs, filesystem etc. (at least to me!) I don't understand why the industry for enthusiasts is tied to a now-outdated interface that is bottle-necking bandwidth? Or even more why Tom's hardware wants to argue that SATA 3 speeds and a single SSD are "fast enough" and that RAID-0ing SSDs isn't worth it. It isn't worth it because the interface is crap and makes it not worth it!
/rant
😀
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram