Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: You really can't go back...

  1. #1

    You really can't go back...

    Yesterday, I lost my C: and while I was trying to get it working (it's toast) I decided to format and install Windows on an old 5400 rpm Sata drive.

    Slow doesn't describe it... You just can't go back.

  2. #2
    Oh also grabbed an old drive out of my stack for a left overs build.

    It apparently was a SATA 1.
    My internet download speed is faster than that now..

    Apart from some very long load times things was quite ok once everything was loaded into RAM.

  3. #3
    Originally Posted by TorTorden View Post (Source)
    It apparently was a SATA 1.
    Rarely a limiting factor for mechanical HDDs, outside of the newest drives in purely sequential transfers.

    A cheap SSD plugged into an SATA 1 port has orders of magnitude better random access performance than the fastest 15k rpm mechanical drive money can buy plugged into a modern SAS port with eight times the bandwidth.

  4. #4
    Originally Posted by TorTorden View Post (Source)
    It apparently was a SATA 1.
    My internet download speed is faster than that now..
    It's great isn't it!

    Consumer WAN links that outperform performance-focused (at the time) local mainline storage in just a few years, it's really quite something!

  5. #5
    Originally Posted by TorTorden View Post (Source)
    My internet download speed is faster than that now..

    Apart from some very long load times things was quite ok once everything was loaded into RAM.
    Yes I often felt to be faster with a good old SATA hard disk than with an SSD

  6. #6
    Originally Posted by Patrick_68000 View Post (Source)
    Yes I often felt to be faster with a good old SATA hard disk than with an SSD
    Wouldn't necessarily say that.
    a decent SSD is 10 faster than a SATA 1 drive, that's assuming you can max bandwidth on either.

    I personally didn't get as much of a massive boost moving to SSD as most where claiming though.
    But for the longest time before then was running at least three drives in striped RAID for OS and games.

    Now if I had been on a laptop and not a 60lbs full-tower pc then that would have been a smidge more a boost.

  7. #7
    Originally Posted by Patrick_68000 View Post (Source)
    Yes I often felt to be faster with a good old SATA hard disk than with an SSD
    That would be "a cheap, terrible, or really old SSD". For pure serial read or write I can see better rust-spinners beat bottom-rung solid-state, but as soon as any seeking is involved or you stop fishing storage from the bargain bins behind the store, there's no competition.

  8. #8
    Yeah it's slow, yet it's still chugging along.

  9. #9
    Originally Posted by TorTorden View Post (Source)
    Wouldn't necessarily say that.
    a decent SSD is 10 faster than a SATA 1 drive, that's assuming you can max bandwidth on either.

    I personally didn't get as much of a massive boost moving to SSD as most where claiming though.
    But for the longest time before then was running at least three drives in striped RAID for OS and games.

    Now if I had been on a laptop and not a 60lbs full-tower pc then that would have been a smidge more a boost.
    I was talking about a Sata II or III hard disk.

    And in a classic office use like internet browsing and office pack software.

    Of course start the computer is always very fast with an SSD.

    And responsiveness is better with an SSD but not always

    As sait Cmdr TorTorden : "Apart from some very long load times things was quite ok once everything was loaded into RAM"