View Single Post
26 Jan 2011  
Cr00zng

Windows 7 64-bit, Windows 8.1 64-bit, OSX Maverick
 
 

I am not sure if I agree with you pparks...

If you remove the performance incentive of the USB 3.0 SSD drive, then might as well stick with HDDs for OS and applications as well.

I understand your point about the storage, and I do the same with HDD storage on my system. For portable storage on the other hand the USB 3.0 does have benefits, even if it cost more. Speed is one of them and the other is backward compatibility to USB 2.0 is the other. Its price is still high and limited USB 3.0 port availability is the other hold back for me to purchase one. But I can see that people who has a need would go for it, including the ones as you stated to "escape via my secret tunnel.." .

I could get one of the Windows backup image, about 30GBs size, onto one of these USB 3.0 external drive in about 1.25 minutes if essenbe's calculation was correct. Compare that to copying the same image from one HDD to another, it took just over seven minutes to complete. That's more than five times than it would take for an SSD...
My System SpecsSystem Spec