[tech] CF card for Arctic

[Scott Young]

They're not HDD's, they're (IDE-compatible [1]) flash memory devices.

SSDs (solid-state storage devices) typically have much, much faster
seek times than hard disks since they don't have any (comparatively)
slow moving parts. ([2] and [3])

However, my understanding is that for sustained reading and writing, a
CF card wouldn't really stand up to a hard disk. (Some forms of flash
memory do, but they're expensive.) Hard disks are reasonably quick
when it comes to sustained transfer - between 40 and 75MiB/s for
reading and writing, it seems. ([4] and [5])

Still, I think it's a good idea. I imagine that for everyday usage, a
CF card would be just as good if not better than a hard disk, given
the almost complete elimination of seek times and the fact that
everyday usage (ie. not transferring gigabytes of games, porn, etc.)
is not simply sustained reading and writing.

Plus, there's a reduction in power consumption, increased reliability,
and they don't make any noise or vibration.

[1] http://www.pcengines.ch/cflash.htm

[2] http://www.storagesearch.com/bitmicro-art3.html
"The typical access time for a Flash based SSD is about 35 - 100
micro-seconds, whereas that of a rotating disk is around 5,000 -
10,000 micro-seconds. That makes a Flash-based SSD approximately 100
times faster than a rotating disk."

[3] http://www23.tomshardware.com/storage.html?modelx=33&model1=117&model2=676&chart=32
New consumer-level hard disks have seek times ranging between 8 and 18ms.

[4] http://www23.tomshardware.com/storage.html?modelx=33&model1=117&model2=676&chart=34
Average read performance roughly between 40MiB/s and 75MiB/s.

[5] http://www23.tomshardware.com/storage.html?modelx=33&model1=117&model2=676&chart=37
Average write performance roughly between 40MiB/s and 75MiB/s.