A modest Linux USB suggestion

Did you know that there are two basic kinds of USB 2.0 drives? I didn’t. But, now thanks to Robert L. Scheier’s article, Not all USB drives are created equal, I now know that are significant differences between drives. And, in particular those differences matter a lot to live USB capable Linux distributions like Fedora 9.
The differences, in short, is differences in the memory type and their I/O controllers. The results are anything but trivial. One type of USB drive will run two to three times faster than their slower brothers and, potentially, last 10 times longer.
As Scheier explains, “The single biggest factor in USB drive performance is whether it contains one of two types of memory: SLC (single-level cell) or MLC (multilevel cell). SLC stores one bit in each memory cell, and MLC stores two bits in each cell.” The more expensive SLC memory runs twice as fast as MLC, “with maximum read speeds of about 14MB/sec. and write speeds of about 10- to 12MB/sec.” It also lasts much longer.
-
- Login or register to post comments
Printer-friendly version
- 1020 reads
PDF version
More in Tux Machines
- Highlights
- Front Page
- Latest Headlines
- Archive
- Recent comments
- All-Time Popular Stories
- Hot Topics
- New Members
Android/ChromeOS/Google Leftovers
| Games: SC-Controller 0.4.2, Campo Santo, Last Epoch and More
|
Android Leftovers
| Ryzen 7 2700X CPUFreq Scaling Governor Benchmarks On Ubuntu Linux
With this week's Ryzen 5 2600X + Ryzen 7 2700X benchmarks some thought the CPUFreq scaling driver or rather its governors may have been limiting the performance of these Zen+ CPUs, so I ran some additional benchmarks this weekend.
Those launch-day Ryzen 5 2600X / Ryzen 7 2700X Ubuntu Linux benchmarks were using the "performance" governor, but some have alleged that the performance governor may now actually hurt AMD systems... Ondemand, of course, is the default CPUFreq governor on Ubuntu and most other Linux distributions. Some also have said the "schedutil" governor that makes use of the kernel's scheduler utilization data may do better on AMD. So I ran some extra benchmarks while changing between CPUFreq's ondemand (default), performance (normally the best for performance, and what was used in our CPU tests), schedutil (the newest option), and powersave (if you really just care about conserving power).
|
Recent comments
10 hours 48 min ago
11 hours 59 min ago
17 hours 20 min ago
1 day 18 hours ago
2 days 23 hours ago
3 days 9 min ago
3 days 11 hours ago
3 days 13 hours ago
4 days 7 hours ago
4 days 8 hours ago