Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 17:56:09 -0700 From: Darren Pilgrim <dmp@pantherdragon.org> To: Communications Machine <ITStaff@wmptl.com> Cc: questions@freebsd.org, small@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Compact Flash vs ATA Disks Message-ID: <3D054AA9.164F3614@pantherdragon.org> References: <001401c210a7$f72b2d20$a800000a@transcon>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Communications Machine wrote: > > I need a comparison in terms primarily of performance and reliability > between using compact flash to boot vs a standard ATA disk drive on a > machine used primarily as a router/firewall. > > I would assume since there is no mechanical spinup/spindown issues with > compact flash, that it would therefore be quicker to startup off of; however > one must still wait for the PC bios anyways... so will it really make that > much of a difference? Guess it really comes down to transfer rates: which is > generally speaking faster (bear in mind only in terms of reading, as > writting to disk will be extremely infrequent). > > In terms of reliability, what is the life expentancy of compact flash vs a > standard ATA disk drive? Again, I believe the mechanical issues involved > with a disk drive may be overcome with compact flash disks, but I don't > honestly know enough about compact flash. CF cards have a wider operating temperature, don't generate nearly as much heat as even a 5400 RPM disk, can take much higher impact shocks, are slient, easier to swap out than a hard disk, are ATAPI compatible, and are available in sizes up to 1GB. They're also slow, though throughput is a minor issue when only used to boot from. A 256MB CF card costs about as much as a new 80GB 7200 RPM drive and a 1GB CF card runs about the same as an IBM 73LZX 73GB SCSI disk. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3D054AA9.164F3614>