Super User is a question and answer site for computer enthusiasts and power users. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I hear they are much faster than SSD flash. However I must admit that I don't do a ton of disk accesses usually.

share|improve this question

migrated from May 19 '11 at 15:24

This question came from our site for system and network administrators.

No, because there's no interface fast enough on most laptops that an ioDrive would benefit from.

  • The SATA-2 interface as 3 Gb/s of bandwidth.
  • SATA-3 is 6 Gb/s.
  • USB 2.0 is only 480 Mb/s.
  • ExpressCard 1.0 is 2.5 Gb/s.
  • USB 3.0 and ExpressCard 2.0 are both 5 Gb/s, so it could have more bandwidth.
  • Finally, there's Intel's Thunderbolt, which is currently at 10 Gb/s, and has much more bandwidth.

However, raw bandwidth is only part of the equation. Overhead and latency also plays a factor. For USB (especially 2.0), both of those are major issues. USB 3.0 should be better, but is expected to have a payload bandwidth of "only" ~3.2 Gb/s (Source).

Thunderbolt's issues are yet to be seen, but a gut guess says that latency would be slightly higher than an internal device. How much that would impact performance at the very high end remains to be seen, but a Thunderbolt-based ioDrive should be capable of being much faster than a SATA-2 version.

share|improve this answer
hypothetically, you COULD hang memory off mini pci-e. – Journeyman Geek Aug 22 '11 at 1:21
@Journeyman Geek: Mini PCIe is only x1 -- it falls between SATA-2 and SATA-3 (assuming PCIe 2.0). Also, mSATA uses the same physical connector as Mini PCIe, but a different logical interface to support SATA-3. – afrazier Aug 22 '11 at 18:24

These drives cost more than a laptop in the first place, so I doubt they made any...


share|improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.