cwbe coordinatez:
101
63540
63709
7448439
7448460
7449585
7449658
7449669
7449962

ABSOLUT
KYBERIA
permissions
you: r,
system: public
net: yes

neurons

stats|by_visit|by_K
source
tiamat
K|my_K|given_K
last
commanders
polls

total descendants::3
total children::1
show[ 2 | 3] flat


Fuha, musim pogooglit nieco k tomuto, aby som o tom vedel varovat kolegov v praci. Nemate nahodou nejaky clanok k teme, ktory by to dokazoval?

Je to skoda, lebo narocne diskove operacie su u nas na SSD asi 4-6x rychlejsie, to co na beznom starsom notebooku s HDD trva 5-10 minut, to trva na novsom 1-2 minuty.




  • 00000101000635400006370907448439074484600744958507449658074496690744996207451002
    kkappabear 07.01.2014 - 09:28:24 level: 1 UP New
    tom's hardware robil nejake vacsie porovnanie. vysledky +/- takto:
    - MTBF tells you nothing about reliability.
    - The annualized failure rate (AFR) is higher than what manufacturers claim.
    - Drives do not have a tendency to fail during the first year of use. Failure rates steadily increase with age.
    - SMART is not a reliable warning system for impending failure detection.
    - The failure rates of “enterprise” and “consumer” drives are very much similar.
    - The failure of one drive in an array increases the likelihood of another drive failure.
    - Temperature has a minor effect on failure rates.

    a ak je rychlost issue, tak je ssd jasna volba, len zalohovat ofc treba stale
    more children: (2)