Quote from: xX MLG L3G1T |\|05C0P35  H4X0R!!!!1Xx on 29-11-2012, 23:32:15 PM

Quote from: Dissident on 29-11-2012, 23:26:03 PM

okay then $60 * 10 + 2 * $50 is $700 for a vastly inferior product compared to an SSD that is a hundred dollars more expensive

Ok, well why exactly is it going to be vastly inferior? It's still faster than an HDD, and that's if youre using USB 3.0. Plus you get the added flexibility of having ten flash drives

it's still way slower than an SSD of marginally higher price (which is the whole point of using flash memory), much less reliable, and if it's in RAID you probably won't be able to use it flexibly at all

Doesn't SATA II transfer at like 3Gbps ideal? and USB 3.0 at 5Mbps ideal?

perhaps in theory, but I highly doubt that a RAID of flash drives would ever outperform an SSD

What about just a flash drive over USB 3.0, without RAID? I've sort of realized that, besides if you're trying to install ARMA II on it, the RAID isn't even necessary. The main point was that I was wondering if you could get a solid state drive by using a bunch of flash drives cheaper than you could get an actual SSD.

 

On the subject of SSDs, if I'm going to judge when I should get one, would it be accurate to calculate the future pricing using Moore's Law?

At that, if both SSD pricing and flash drive pricing follow Moore's law the same, isn't USB 3.0 getting cheaper and more widely used faster than SATA 3?(which seem to be basically comparable). If that's the case, using flash drives in place of SSD should be getting proportionally cheaper.

Real man's SSD

I didn't know that there were first graders that knew so much about computers!

On the subject of SSDs, if I'm going to judge when I should get one, would it be accurate to calculate the future pricing using Moore's Law?

At that, if both SSD pricing and flash drive pricing follow Moore's law the same, isn't USB 3.0 getting cheaper and more widely used faster than SATA 3?(which seem to be basically comparable). If that's the case, using flash drives in place of SSD should be getting proportionally cheaper.

I suppose it's possible, although SSDs are making such big strides lately that I'm betting there will be a significant quality gulf between SSDs and USB flash storage devices for some time to come.  Everything seems to be headed in the direction of mobile and embedded computing anyways so it might be a moot point soon enough.

fetching raid array of usb flash drives

if you try to write as much to a usb flashdrive as you do to a hdd/ssd it'll burn out in like a week

whats the best format to store all my hentai on??????

and it has to be secure so MY MOM cant be able to find it!!!!!!!

whats the best format to store all my hentai on??????

Put it in a truecrypt virtual encrypted disk
http://www.truecrypt.org/

On the subject of SSDs, if I'm going to judge when I should get one, would it be accurate to calculate the future pricing using Moore's Law?

no. Moore's law dictates computational ability not market value, and besides that it is related to chip architecture and not drive memory. Companies base price off of demand, not how sophisticated the architecture is.

At that, if both SSD pricing and flash drive pricing follow Moore's law the same, isn't USB 3.0 getting cheaper and more widely used faster than SATA 3?(which seem to be basically comparable). If that's the case, using flash drives in place of SSD should be getting proportionally cheaper.

Dude it's literally not possible to do hard or soft raiding on USB drives, because flash memory doesn't work in a way to allow that. When you pass a file to a flash drive, the flash drive uses an on-board processing unit to determine how to store the file in block memory. When you pass a file to a hard drive or SSD no on-board processing is done(I'm not 100% sure about SSDs but I'm assuming), there is a direct transcribing of 1's and 0's (as far as I know).

Even if you did find a way to raid together a bunch of USB drives you'd be dealing with two main limiting factors. The first is that you wouldn't be able to optimize block space since you would have to break the file up into blocks beforehand to send to the drives. The second is the fact that you have to pre-process the file, which would then be processed again by each drive. This would make writing data so inefficient that you may actually end up with a slower transfer rate than an individual flash drive or SATA2 HDD.

Also I should mention that the probability of having memory corruption in a raided flash drive would be increased by every additional flash drive present.

Basically this is one of the dumbest ideas I've heard in a very long time.
 

thank god we have highly the computer scientist to explain tings to us laymans, i am forever grateful because i now understand exactly what is happening

computer garbage flashdrive garbage hardrive garbage linux garbage tetris