Re: hibernate: swap on SSD = not fast
Le vendredi 24 août 2012 à 12:04 +0100, Darac Marjal a écrit :
> I might be wrong here, but isn't the key benefit of SSDs that they have
> a tiny access time? But that their read speed is about the same as a
> normal disk (also, I might be wrong, but I understand their write speed
> is average).
This would have been true some years ago:
Comparison of average sequential reading rates (HDD of 2012 and SSD of
2011):
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/ssd-charts-2011/AS-SSD-Sequential-Read,2782.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/hdd-charts-2012/-01-Read-Throughput-Average-h2benchw-3.16,2901.html
Please note that I compared SSD with desktop HDD: mobile HDDs are
generally slower.
About write speed, the very best HDD gave 164.06MB/s on average while
*most* SSDs are above 150MB/s and the best reaches a few MB/s less than
400.
>
> Hibernation, in contrast, is about writing out (and reading back) a
> linear stream of data.
But you are right here: sequential read/write should be fast on HDDs as
well. But with and SSD twice as fast as the previous HDD, you would
still expect suspend time to be cut off by a factor of 2.
>
> So, in summary, while SSDs may well help with swap performance, I'd not
> expect them to be brilliant at hibernation.
Seems right.
Reply to: