Is SSDs are really better than HDD for home use?

[Harnoor]

I was just roaming around an internet and have found something about the HDDs as Western Digital have launched the new hard disks of space 500 GB. And these hard disks are getting closer to the first SSDs performance in some applications. Is there somebody who can commit that the what is better in between both of these? SSDs are really better then that of HDDs for using it on home desktop machine?

[Maxforu]

The acronym stands for SSD Solid State Disk and refers to a drive, which consists of non-volatile memory chips will be built (and not like HDDs from magnetic disks). There are two types of memory chips, which are used in current SSDs. SLC (Single- Level Cell ) NAND memory, and MLC (Multi -Level Cell) NAND memory. SLC chips store only one transistor per bit ( 0 or 1) and can thus be read faster and described. MLC store two bits (00, 01, 10 or 11) per transistor. This fit twice as much data on the chips , but decreases the average reading ( 2x) and write (3x ) per cell NAND.

[Rawko]

Since HDDs can write data only , there are not delete them . Thus the operating data is sufficient for the delete command does not extend to the drive. The longer you used the drive so already , the more requests to write data to overwrite . For SSDs quite bad. To prevent this , there are different strategies. On one hand, the SSD controller through a variety of strategies can take care of the problem.

[Killen]

Another problem with SSDs is the limited number 10,000 Write / in MLCs . hierum must also take care of the used controller , so it does not lead to data loss. To distribute the wear evenly and possibly some of the cells to exclude all SSDs offer yet additional ( not usable ) space (the X25 -M is said to have eg 7-8% extra free memory).

[T.J.]

During the installation of SSD drives , you have to actually do anything differently than normal HDDs. Some of the first SSDs Generation , however, had problems with the installation of the operating system ( leading to slow access time to time-outs ), but this was during our internal SSDs not the case. In operation, you should turn off the automatic defragmentation (eg Vista), because the defragmentation tools are optimized for use in HDDs and SSDs more harm than good . Some sources also recommend Prefetch and SuperFetch off, to reduce the requests (and thus the wear) .

[Hardwareman]

I would generally recommend Indilinx SSDs with 64MB cache controller, and if you a 128 GB SSD enough then , if two, then two 64's and then operate as a Raid0 . Your motherboard has the ICH10R can then also . The two infected SSDs (Channel 0 and 1) in the BIOS setup to call the raid , a Raid0 create and add the two SSDs.

[deoWo]

well, SSDs are not actually designed as a desktop hard drives , but rather on the go , they are low power (which is not on the current generation can always claim ) and robust, because they contain no moving parts, more. Something like playing for desktop hard drives is not so important here because you have permanent power always have enough "juice ", and moves a desktop computer is indeed rare. And clearly , you could pack more memory chips ind housing, then the record would also more expensive. Current SSDs are actually for the so-called "mass market " a little too expensive, as are normal hard drives much cheaper , because you get simply " more GB for your money . "

[RoninBlade]

SSD is much slower than an HDD that will change there in the future because what is there intensive research may be but as I said it that counts now is situated. I have a 1000h and a work colleague an Asus with SSD and you will notice quite a difference.