this post was submitted on 13 Apr 2024
352 points (97.3% liked)

Technology

35106 readers
221 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The ones used for 4K recordings are not slow 100+MBps, I won't say prone to failure as such, flash storage can only handle a finite number of writes but we can mitigate that by using wear leveling.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

That's pretty slow for terabyte sized storage. And slow compared to the alternatives, too (600 MB/s or Gabs/s).

Spinning hard disks are faster than this, too. Have been for decade(s).

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago

I wish SD Cards also had some specifications for random access speed.

I used to have a UHS-I SanDisk card which felt much faster than my current UHS-III Samsung card. It's really evident when searching through the storage, waiting for photo thumbnails to cache, etc..

I am not sure whether to go for a UHS-I SanDisk or UHS-III Samsung next. That SanDisk might not handle higher bitrate 4K.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Hehe, I think I haven't caught up with the improvements, flash with 1GB/s transfer speed is ludicrously fast!

[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago

All SSD and NVMe are also "just flash", and reach 5GB/s and more, often limited by the available interface bandwidth until very recently.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Other formats can exceed that by caching & writing to multiple chips at once i guess.

[–] Aceticon 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

The NVMe SSDs are very fasy - up to 4GB/s even for a not especially fast drive - because NVMe is an interface that connects to the PCI bus and depending on the PCI version and number of lanes in the NVMe interface (in that interface there are two variations for SSDs, so they can use 2 or 4 PCI lanes, with 4 lanes having twice the bandwidth that 2 lanes have).

The most recent version of NVMe SSDs which use PCIe version 4 can, when using 4 lanes, theoretically reach 8GB/s and there are already drives out there that get pretty close to it.

However some drives of a similar size and connector are not NVMe but actually SATA (same protocol as the older SSDs) and that stuff is limited to about 500MB/s same as the fastest SSDs from a few years ago.

I've recently got a mini PC and had to dive again into all this stuff (I've been doing the hardware update of my own desktop PCs for decades now and even building them from scratch but haven't had to look into it for several years) and the tech has really advanced since the earlier SSD days which were not that long ago.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Gen 4 isn't even the fastest any more.

One of the fastest Gen 5 NVME SSDs can do max Sequential read at 14 500 MB/s (theoretical of course, but not far of)