Wii U was the right choice about hard drive so you can use cheap better USB.

#51Infinity8378(Topic Creator)Posted 3/28/2013 12:36:30 AM(edited)
I'll just refer to this "144MB" the max data transfer rate of a reasonably priced harddrive.

"Here's one of the cheapest internal SATA 3 harddrive i could find it's average read write speed is 125 MB/s 4 USBs with a read write speed of 30 MB/s would be pretty much the same without access time latency and other harddrive hindrances. USB 2.0's theoretical max is 60MB/s * 4 or 240MB/s anyway which is higher than 144MB the max data transfer rate. "Seagate Barracuda 3.5in 320GB SATA III Desktop Internal Hard Drive ..."
https://www.google.com/search?q=hard+drive+%22sata+III%22&hl=en&tbs=vw:l,p_ord:p&tbm=shop&sa=X&ei=4C1SUaeWNoPA4APq3IG4Bg&ved=0CHwQuw0oAQ

And its ~60 dollars which i more than USB which is ~50"
#52New LinkPosted 3/28/2013 5:52:44 AM
Infinity8378 posted...
I'll just refer to this "144MB" the max data transfer rate of a reasonably priced harddrive.

"Here's one of the cheapest internal SATA 3 harddrive i could find it's average read write speed is 125 MB/s 4 USBs with a read write speed of 30 MB/s would be pretty much the same without access time latency and other harddrive hindrances. USB 2.0's theoretical max is 60MB/s * 4 or 240MB/s anyway which is higher than 144MB the max data transfer rate. "Seagate Barracuda 3.5in 320GB SATA III Desktop Internal Hard Drive ..."
https://www.google.com/search?q=hard+drive+%22sata+III%22&hl=en&tbs=vw:l,p_ord:p&tbm=shop&sa=X&ei=4C1SUaeWNoPA4APq3IG4Bg&ved=0CHwQuw0oAQ

And its ~60 dollars which i more than USB which is ~50"


Are you ignorant or stupid?

Four devices plugged into a single bus which only gets ~35MBs will get you a combined total of ~35MBs. Lets say that by some act of magic you manage to achive the perfect theorhetical I/O speed of 60MBs, you'll effectively be writing 15MBs to each NAND in the RAID (the only way it's going to benefit.) However, this is the real world, so your method would actually equate getting between 8-9MBs I/O off of using four USB NAND devices.
---
-SNES- Hasta Pasta!
Sieh nur wie ich laufen kann... Mich fängst du nicht, ich bin der Lebkuchenmann!
#53PraetorXynPosted 3/28/2013 6:26:44 AM
Golden Maven posted...
Infinity8378 posted...
USB flash drives are better than hard drives.


That's like saying monitors are better than TVs.


Monitors ARE better than TV's. Color, resolution (on higher end models at least), saturation, contrast, REFRESH RATE, connectivity (DisplayPort has the highest bandwidth, followed by Dual-Link DVI, followed by HDMI, followed by single-link DVI), IPS/PVA panels are gorgeous, etc. etc.

This is why 60 inch TV's cost $2k-$3k and 60 inch monitors cost $10k+.
#54Infinity8378(Topic Creator)Posted 3/28/2013 10:39:01 AM(edited)
New Link posted...
Infinity8378 posted...
I'll just refer to this "144MB" the max data transfer rate of a reasonably priced harddrive.

"Here's one of the cheapest internal SATA 3 harddrive i could find it's average read write speed is 125 MB/s 4 USBs with a read write speed of 30 MB/s would be pretty much the same without access time latency and other harddrive hindrances. USB 2.0's theoretical max is 60MB/s * 4 or 240MB/s anyway which is higher than 144MB the max data transfer rate. "Seagate Barracuda 3.5in 320GB SATA III Desktop Internal Hard Drive ..."
https://www.google.com/search?q=hard+drive+%22sata+III%22&hl=en&tbs=vw:l,p_ord:p&tbm=shop&sa=X&ei=4C1SUaeWNoPA4APq3IG4Bg&ved=0CHwQuw0oAQ

And its ~60 dollars which i more than USB which is ~50"


Are you ignorant or stupid?

Four devices plugged into a single bus which only gets ~35MBs will get you a combined total of ~35MBs. Lets say that by some act of magic you manage to achive the perfect theorhetical I/O speed of 60MBs, you'll effectively be writing 15MBs to each NAND in the RAID (the only way it's going to benefit.) However, this is the real world, so your method would actually equate getting between 8-9MBs I/O off of using four USB NAND devices.


The WiiU sub ports are on different sides of the system they obviously don't share one bus. Let's say the Bus is only at 60 MB/s(but it's probably higher) for transferring over usb's maximum as documented in the previous post where they talk about super speed vs full speed. The two usb's in the front would share one bus and the two in the back would share one bus. The So if you download it'll go to the usb host core where you can read two sets of BITS as one. The HOST CORE has .12KB of memory so all you would have to do is split the bits in half every .2KB when writing the bits to the two usbs then download sequentially to RAM then reading the file from the two buses. Kinda like how you can use an ethernet port while reading the game from a harddrive.
http://www.keil.com/rl-arm/rl-usbhost_size.asp
#55Nice_Kirbyfan9Posted 3/28/2013 10:32:39 AM(edited)
From: Infinity8378 | #001
Wii u is a more customizable experience

Not reading the whole topic but no it is not. The PS3 can use USB flash drives, External HDDs and Laptop HDDs. The PS3 is just as (probably more) customizable experience than the Wii U. When the wii u fanboys stop purposefully spreading false information maybe a few trolls will go away.
---
If you disagree with the views expressed in this post, feel free to put me on ignore.
http://i.imgur.com/7AUmapo.gif
#56Infinity8378(Topic Creator)Posted 3/28/2013 10:47:10 AM
Wii U can use SD cards as well in addition to external harddrives, flash drives and has better faster internal memory. It's more customizable because it allows you to choose how much additional memory you want rather than throwing in a larger harddrive. USB is a cheaper alternative to harddrives anyway so it makes sense.
#57Nice_Kirbyfan9Posted 3/28/2013 10:56:21 AM
From: Infinity8378 | #056
Wii U can use SD cards as well in addition to external harddrives, flash drives and has better faster internal memory.

Having better faster internal memory does not make it more customizable. Certain PS3s use SD cards and all of them allow you to change the Internal HDD as well as cloud storage. The PS3 is more customizable. This is not even a contest.

It's more customizable because it allows you to choose how much additional memory you want rather than throwing in a larger harddrive

The PS3 allows you to do this as well. Just because nintendo gives you a tiny HDD does not somehow make it more customizable.

USB is a cheaper alternative to harddrives anyway so it makes sense.

And Sony lets you Use USB as well, as we have already discussed.

Lets see (correct me if Im wrong)

Wii U:
External
SD Card
Flash Drive

PS3
External
Flash Drive
Cloud Storage
Laptop HDD
SD Card (some models)

The PS3 is more customizable.
---
If you disagree with the views expressed in this post, feel free to put me on ignore.
http://i.imgur.com/7AUmapo.gif
#58SlimeSwayzePosted 3/28/2013 10:57:35 AM
Right now it's hard to make the argument that Nintendo made any good choices regarding the Wii U in terms of making the system marketable and appealing to consumers. That includes their decision regarding system storage.
---
Currently Playing: Too many to report.
#59Infinity8378(Topic Creator)Posted 3/28/2013 11:21:42 AM
Wii U:
External
SD Card
USB Flash Drive
Internal Flash Memory
Nintendo Eshop


PS3
External
Flash Drive
Cloud Storage(Only with Playstation Plus membership)
Laptop HDD
SD Card (some models)

fixed
#60Infinity8378(Topic Creator)Posted 3/28/2013 11:28:00 AM
As I said before Flash Drives are superior to hard drives external or interal because they don't have 9ms latency.