Ganoncrotch said:
If you are encountering this sort of read rate while actually using the drive in your machine, you need to defragment it... I thought windows even did this on a weekly basis now as long as you aren't still running Windows XP or something? But yeah, there is no chance in hell that a 50gb game like GTA5 is going to be relying on Random seeks for data... just... no. |
I'm talking about technology in general. Game consoles are less impacted than others as the games have been built from ground up to stream sequentially off inadequate optical media, etc. for some time now.
It's a fact that magneto mechanical storage is primitive and archaic and is an Achilles heel holding back our technology for decades.
People want to talk about AI and computer vision? How long does it take to commit a couple gigs of data to a HDD? It needs to take an instant, not a couple minutes. A human doesn't pause and display an hourglass or a progress bar for 90 seconds when recalling a vivid memory consisting of the equivalent of gigabytes of data in an instant. The IO gap between CPU/RAM and storage is ridiculous and it has done nothing but grow ever since the initial move in the 1960s from non volatile universal core memory to leaky DRAM which necessitated a 3rd storage tier in the first place.
Stuff like XPoint can't come soon enough and displace and retire these primitive cave man storage contraptions. It's time for IO to make the same leaps and bounds as CPU and RAM performance has for the past 30 years and catch up.
Does anybody use VHS and cassette anymore? Nope. Why hard drives then? Same shit.
Even if you want to argue sequential vs random we are still talking < 150 MB/s vs... 60+ GB/s. That's still disgusting. We shouldn't be measuring anything in KB/s or MB/s anymore. We will be doing it right when our non volatile "hard drive" access time and bandwidth are indistinguishable from SiSoft Sandra scores...
The average Joe consumers here don't truly understand just how inhibiting and limiting IOPS has been to our technological process as a species for the past few decades.
100 MB/s was fast when your entire OS was <= 100 MB... Not decades later with data measured in TB.
If you want to argue cost and capacity or how they are more important than speed then you still shouldn't be using HDDs, you should be using linear tape if you're going to be stingy and count gigabytes per penny and like to hoard a personal copy of the entire internet...
