Comment

Comment on Why was file search much faster in Windows XP than in subsequent versions?

It’s fairly common knowledge that SSDs outperform HDDs in both sequential and random reads, and while the file size & number of files have an impact, it doesn’t negate this difference.

A quick search confirmed that SSDs perform better in your scenario than HDDs. I don’t care enough to spend time finding proper references, because again - this is simply common knowledge.

source

Sort:hotnew top

FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
Still no sources. Interesting.

source
- douglasg14b@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
  
  Moving/copying/reading/deleting tonnes of tiny files isn’t significantly faster on an ssd because the requirements for doing so are not limited by HDDs in the first place.
  
  You mean the actual physical actuator and spinning platter? A hard drive has which limits its traversal speed over its physical media?
  
  You mean that kind of limitation?
  
  I would highly recommend that you learn what a hard drive is before you start commenting about its its performance characteristics. 🤦🤦🤦
  
  For everyone else in the thread, remember that arguing with an idiot is always a losing battle because they will drag you down to their level and win with experience.
  
  source
  - FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
    Again - there’s no significant real world difference between an SSD and a HDD in the scenario I’m describing. Neither drive types are the limiting factor in speed of the operation.
    
    source