| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
spongiforme
Joined: 02 Aug 2006
Posts: 168
Location: Montpellier, France
|
 Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:41 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Marcin wrote: | | Flash memory have much smaller limit of read-write operations than standard HDD. That means it will damage much faster and you will loss (I hope not) important data. |
The electronics embedded in CF cards can detect failing flash blocks and remap them before they are unusable, as well as distribute writes to some extent accross valid blocks so frequently written areas don't fail quickly. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_memory |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
D.8080
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 1474
Location: Italy
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
The point was that it can't be a perfect substitute for hdd intensive apps.
Otherwise flash is a good option.
Do you remeber microdrive? Disappeared a bit... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mixeur
Joined: 06 Jan 2005
Posts: 4038
Location: Sochaux, France
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 1:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think that I will use SSD or Compact flash for my next system upgrade. If I can find cheap 8MB SATA SSD (enough for XP), it will be perfect !
300x Compact Flash are far faster that any 7200rpm HDD.
_________________
Register on x86-guide.net to manage and share your collection on-line !
Need to find a x86 ? Go to http://www.x86-guide.net ! Over 12000 chips listed !
Last edited by Mixeur on Mon Oct 22, 2007 3:52 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JAC
Joined: 24 Jul 2005
Posts: 3469
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 1:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I know its not silent, but using a small notebook drive with a 2.5" to 3.5" adaptor is also a possibility for additional drives on the system. 100GB+ is pretty cheap now in notebook drives. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
