• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

What's going to be better for Ubuntu from a flash drive?

Obsoleet

Obsoleet

Platinum Member
Is there going to be a speed difference between the 16GB and 32GB OCZ Rally2 flash drives?

I plan on booting a laptop off one using either of these with Ubuntu. I've read some info that leads me to believe the 16GB is going to be faster, but also some that shows the 32GB won't be any slower at small file transfers and will be just as good for running an OS off of.

Thanks!
 
Are you planning on using the USB drive as the main OS of the laptop? Or just for emergencies?

If you have existing usb drives, you can check out their speed with crystaldiskmark 2.1 and see how it performs. I have an old supertalent 4GB that reads at 29.11MB/s and writes at 7.6MB/s. As the file size drops, the write speed drops. For emergencies or non-main OS situations, it works fine. This is due to the fact that most of the time is reading data. The rally2 is supposed to have 32-35MB/s read and 8-15MB/s write. That shouldn't be too bad.

I use a 300x CF card with Window XP on my laptop. It has read/write speeds of 45MB/s (read) and 40MB/s(write). Writing 4KB sized files, it drops to 0.22MB/s. The old supertalent drops to 0.016MB/s.
 
As the main OS. When I bring my laptop home I like to use it to browse the net since I don't own a laptop of my own.

I'm reading review on the SuperTalent PicoB right now. It seems ok but some people are saying it's too slow. There doesn't seem to be a concensus on what drive is the fastest for portable apps.
 
Would booting from your Pico be faster because it would load everything into RAM then? I'm wondering if loading Ubuntu from a Pico and starting FF3 would be faster than loading it as a portable app on another install.
 
If you're already booting off the usb drive, it'd be faster to just keep the apps on the same device. Portable apps load slower than regular apps. I notice this when I use portable apps on my harddrive.

Ubuntu isn't that lean of a system. Maybe there is a lighter version. You'd probably need at least 4GB of space to do it. 4GB will yield 1.6GB of free space after a clean instead of Ubuntu 8.04. You will probably want the extra space for apps and data and for the system to do updates.
 
All i really want to do is to have a web browser on flash. I thought it'd be nice to have my own OS on a thumb drive for customization like installing web extension software ect.

I'm not really needing great performance besides the ability to boot an OS and load up a fully loaded internet experience.
 
Originally posted by: aceO07
My supertalenet pico (c? the tiniest one) reads at about 31MB/s and writes 9MB/s. Firefox 3 portable takes about 23seconds to startup and get into google.com


To get higher speeds you might want to consider a card reader and a CF card. http://www.hjreggel.net/cardspeed/index.html

Check out the UDMA CF link.
Click to expand...

This is the laptop I'm working with. Can I use a CF card in the SD slot?
What do you think my best option is?


I'm wondering if I can boot off the SD/MMC slot or the expressbus slot. In the bios the only options I have for boot are the multibay, usb cdrom, usb floppy, usb superdisk, notebook hdd, usb hard disk and network controller.

Right now I'm thinking of a virtual machine using a SD card or USB flash. Or portable apps on a USB or SD.
First I'll prob try to boot off one of those and see how they perform.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top