Having no moving parts is, naturally, important. There's no platter rotation or read/write head motion so SSDs -- in theory -- should use less power than equivalent mechanical hard drives. They should also (again, in theory) be faster than a mechanical hard drive at just about anything. Working off an electrical grid, there's no time wasted positioning the read/write head and then waiting for it to settle down and start doing its thing. SSDs just do it. (That's a bit of an oversimplification, but it's fair.)Check it out over here. The reporter concludes SSDs have yet to live up to their true potential, their performance isn't stellar and they still cost way too much.
So have you ever wondered if it's really worth it to plunk down the extra $1,300 for an SSD-equipped MacBook Air? Or have you been tempted to swap the current mechanical hard drive out of your portable and slide one of these high tech bad boys inside? I did.
Performance showdown: SSD vs HDD
Posted on Sunday, May 04 2008 @ 14:12 CEST by Thomas De Maesschalck
ComputerWorld has a roundup of several solid state drives and hard disk drives: