<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:series="http://unfoldingneurons.com/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: SSD = Not-So-Good At Present?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pcmech.com/article/ssd-not-so-good-at-present/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pcmech.com/article/ssd-not-so-good-at-present/</link>
	<description>Helping Normal People Get Their Geek On</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 04:43:08 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dave</title>
		<link>http://www.pcmech.com/article/ssd-not-so-good-at-present/comment-page-1/#comment-26783</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2009 10:40:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pcmech.com/article/ssd-not-so-good-at-present/#comment-26783</guid>
		<description>Yes i agree.

for my primative test i copied a 1gb file from h/disk over sata to ssd and it took about 30 secs so ok we know ssd is not to fast on write but then i tested the read speed by copying the same 1gb to ramdisk from ssd that is ultra fast as you know  and the performace was about 15 seconds so not the 200X i and been lead to beleive on read speeds.

i will be using the drive for sql-db so maybe it will speed it up a little bit and make it worth the money but don&#039;t like me swallow all the sales crap you read on eBay who are the biggest crooks going.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes i agree.</p>
<p>for my primative test i copied a 1gb file from h/disk over sata to ssd and it took about 30 secs so ok we know ssd is not to fast on write but then i tested the read speed by copying the same 1gb to ramdisk from ssd that is ultra fast as you know  and the performace was about 15 seconds so not the 200X i and been lead to beleive on read speeds.</p>
<p>i will be using the drive for sql-db so maybe it will speed it up a little bit and make it worth the money but don&#8217;t like me swallow all the sales crap you read on eBay who are the biggest crooks going.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rider200</title>
		<link>http://www.pcmech.com/article/ssd-not-so-good-at-present/comment-page-1/#comment-17576</link>
		<dc:creator>Rider200</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 03:03:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pcmech.com/article/ssd-not-so-good-at-present/#comment-17576</guid>
		<description>I have a OCZ 64 Gig in my desktop for over two months now.

Actually only paid $169 for with a $50 rebate. Now I could have had a 500 Gig for the same price. But decided to go with the SSD for my system boot drive, 64 Gig on the system drive is quite a lot of space, considering I have over 600 Gig in two other drives for games and stuff. :)

I am very pleased with my purchase and the performace is as good as a mechanical hard drive, I have how ever moved the swap files to the other two drives so that improves the performance.

I read in the Overclockers forum where a guy said it took over two hours to load Vista on a 32 Gig. I used an image from the orginal mechanical hard drive, it takes about the same amount of time to put the image on the SSD as the mechanical hard drive. 

I wrote an article about my experacne,it is in the upgrade section of my web site.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have a OCZ 64 Gig in my desktop for over two months now.</p>
<p>Actually only paid $169 for with a $50 rebate. Now I could have had a 500 Gig for the same price. But decided to go with the SSD for my system boot drive, 64 Gig on the system drive is quite a lot of space, considering I have over 600 Gig in two other drives for games and stuff. <img src='http://www.pcmech.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>I am very pleased with my purchase and the performace is as good as a mechanical hard drive, I have how ever moved the swap files to the other two drives so that improves the performance.</p>
<p>I read in the Overclockers forum where a guy said it took over two hours to load Vista on a 32 Gig. I used an image from the orginal mechanical hard drive, it takes about the same amount of time to put the image on the SSD as the mechanical hard drive. </p>
<p>I wrote an article about my experacne,it is in the upgrade section of my web site.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Creditor</title>
		<link>http://www.pcmech.com/article/ssd-not-so-good-at-present/comment-page-1/#comment-14528</link>
		<dc:creator>Creditor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2008 15:39:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pcmech.com/article/ssd-not-so-good-at-present/#comment-14528</guid>
		<description>All new hardware is buggy at first. I&#039;m surprised there have been so few issues with SDD to start with.

Prices are dropping fast and storage is going up fast. 

Flash memory has dropped astoundingly in recent years, with the big move to replace HDDs we&#039;ll see even bigger drops in flash memory. Of course, manufacturuers could just use the demand to raise prices and stagnate the market and shoot themselves in the foot like they often do.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All new hardware is buggy at first. I&#8217;m surprised there have been so few issues with SDD to start with.</p>
<p>Prices are dropping fast and storage is going up fast. </p>
<p>Flash memory has dropped astoundingly in recent years, with the big move to replace HDDs we&#8217;ll see even bigger drops in flash memory. Of course, manufacturuers could just use the demand to raise prices and stagnate the market and shoot themselves in the foot like they often do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
