3 ms·
To me that reads 3x, not "almost 10x". The main differrence here is probably power. A desktop/server is happy to send 15W to the SSD and hundreds of watts to th
by adgjlsfhk1 11mo ago
To me that reads 3x, not "almost 10x". The main differrence here is probably power. A desktop/server is happy to send 15W to the SSD and hundreds of watts to the CPU, while a laptop wants the SSD running in the ~1 watt range and the CPU in the 10s of watts range.
- simlevesque 11mo agoThere's over twice as much content in the first test. It's around 3.8gb/s vs 30gb/s if you divide both folder size and both du durations. That makes it 7.9 times faster and I'm comfortable calling this "almost 10 times".
- adgjlsfhk1 11mo agooops. I missed the size diff. that's a solid 8x. that's cool!
- ls65536 11mo agoThe total size isn't what matters in this case but rather the total number of files/directories that need to be traversed (and their file sizes summed).
- simlevesque 11mo agoI responded here, it's essentially the same content: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46150030 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46150030