[icedchai]

You may be off a bit. A gigabit is only around 125 megabytes a second. A low end consumer SSD is closer to a 550 megabytes second, or ~4 gigabits. A high-end NVMe SSD will get you 3 or 4 gigabytes a second. 30 to 40x a gigabit!

[robocat]

> A high-end NVMe SSD will get you 3 or 4 gigabytes a second

That is PCIe 3.0. For example the Samsung PCIe 4.0 990 PRO just released: sequential read 7.45GB/s and write 6.9GB/s — https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/08/samsung-announces-99...

[tenebrisalietum]

Grandma running pirated Word 2007 on an ancient dust-clogged Dell laptop that her grandson upgraded with a cheap 256GB Lite-On mSATA SSD stolen from a throwaway work computer is probably only getting 125MByte/sec and certainly lower than that due to the plethora of IE addons constantly writing to it.

[machinawhite]

1. Stop confronting me

2. Can confirm these writing speeds

[WJW]

I'm now imagining this ancient grandma writing 125 MB/s into her pirated text editor, just cranking out volume after volume of cheap detective and romance novels. Later, after her death, it is discovered that this lady was the ghostwriter behind all of the top 50 bestsellers of the last 30 years. She would write faster too, if it weren't for that crappy SSD her grandchildren set her up with.

[TylerE]

Under ideal circumstances, yes. When say, torrenting, or anything else with non-ideal file access patterns real world speeds are not going to be nearly that high, especially on a consumer-grade drive.

[DannyBee]

Stress tests on consumer SSD's consistently show 300-500megabytes/s. The whole point of an SSD is that it has ridiculously high available iops, so what you are saying literally does not make sense.

a consumer SSD will have about 50k iops at that 300-500megabyte/s . The access pattern will not practically matter at all until you saturate that or get close. The drive is effectively constant time until you hit the limits of the interface, or at least get somewhere near it. A consumer will never get near it.

So they can expect, and consistent testing shows, they will get 300-500 megabytes/s in real world conditions, and even harsh conditions.

I actually have no idea why you don't just say "yeah, i was wrong" and move on. It's clear you are wrong about this - there is no data to support what you are saying. It's also totally and completely orthogonal to a more rasonable argument - they don't care about the speed anyway.

IE arguing they don't have equipment that can saturate 1gbps is silly - they clearly do. arguing they wouldn't care either way because the speed difference doesn't matter to them is more reasonable.

[icedchai]

Nothing is ever ideal. The point is available SSD disk I/O bandwidth will exceed network bandwidth well above a gigabit.

[TylerE]

And my point is that for 99% of people even 1Gb is overkill, so I'm not seeing why they expect Joe Smith to suddenly start buying $500 routers.

[icedchai]

Yeah, I completely agree with you there! The average person doesn't need gigabit speeds. The only reason I even upgraded from 100 megabits to 300 is because it was literally 5 bucks more a month.