I think it's time to reconsider something here. If I uninstalled the CS4 apps that I don't use, I could fit my OS and applications on a 30GB drive.My current OS + apps takes up 51 GB. I think a 60 GB drive would be the minimum I would need, 80 GB would be safer, and 100+ a luxury.
Newegg keeps their mail in rebates a bit more in check then TigerDirect.
I'm always seeing these great drive prices, that turn out to be mail in rebates...
I think it's time to reconsider something here. If I uninstalled the CS4 apps that I don't use, I could fit my OS and applications on a 30GB drive.
The only reasons I use a 60GB drive is because it was on sale, and I don't relish the idea of less than four gigabytes of play.
I do. Replaced 36GB SAS drives, as you may recall.Sechs:
I thought you already had a SSD setup?
GS
Do yours get slower towards the edge of the drive?An 80GB has just enough more capacity than 60GB to make them much more useful. I also prefer to avoid filling an SSD too close to capacity for performance/longevity reasons. :cheers:
Do yours get slower towards the edge of the drive?
Just tap them lightly to compress the data.
Do yours get slower towards the edge of the drive?
Just tap them lightly to compress the data.
Do yours get slower towards the edge of the drive?
Just tap them lightly to compress the data.
There are better uses for RAMDisks. :spiderman:
Interesting. The way I think SSD is eventually heading is towards dedicated M/B slots similar to RAM. In fact, I mentioned as much on storagereview.com years ago ( too lazy to look for the post ). This development seems to support that. And I'm having trouble even wrapping my head around 600 MB/sec transfer rates, never mind 20 GB/sec.http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/storag...nts_New_Interface_for_Solid_State_Drives.html
600 MB/sec not enough?
20 GB/sec potential delivered.
Interesting. The way I think SSD is eventually heading is towards dedicated M/B slots similar to RAM. In fact, I mentioned as much on storagereview.com years ago ( too lazy to look for the post ). This development seems to support that. And I'm having trouble even wrapping my head around 600 MB/sec transfer rates, never mind 20 GB/sec.
I think dedicated slots would be the wrong direction. We already have multi-purpose slots that work just fine (PCIe).
Better yet, it's unnecessary.There are better uses for RAMDisks.
Better yet, it's unnecessary.
Nothing, but it's not exactly the fastest. Go up a few pages in this very thread.
Fewer chips/channels. Basically left 1/2 the flash off the 80GB version.
Maybe if you had a better understanding of how Windows used memory, you would.If applications were all well written I would agree. It is less of an issue as 64-bit apps are becoming more common.