Has anyone tried an SSD in the X41? *PICS*

Message

dstrauss · #481 Post by **dstrauss** » Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:36 am

I know this is going to come across as naive and probably downright stupid, but are all of these benchmark concerns relative. I just ran the benchmark on the stock 60 gb hd and it is pathetic as well, even on the small file (4k) writes. In real life terms, how do all these various CF cards "feel"? Are they generally slower/faster in these areas:

Booting
Opening programs
Saving files to disk (in Word/Excel)

At any point did the system just seem to stall during any of these operations. The reason I ask, and I've already gotten great advice from several veterans here, is that I'm looking to go 16gb 300x for boot disk and 2 x 32gb 133x for storage (slave ide and pc card). I've noticed that the 8gb in the SD slot is a lot slower in copying files from the HD, but so long as it does this in the background and not slowing down my foreground operations, I'll take the ruggedness, quiet, and battery saving over pure speed (what am I saying, the stock HD is a snail already).

gongo2k1 · #482 Post by **gongo2k1** » Tue Jul 29, 2008 10:29 am

my x41 definitely felt a bit zippier with the 266x cf (except for a slight hitch when opening/emptying the trash, but i think that has more to do with using noatime since gnome might rely on that for showing the empty/full icon).

my boot time was cut in half but the bios 2010 error would consume an extra 10 seconds, so that kinda ruins the effect.

all yum/rpm updates were MUCH faster as well.

however, being that my 60gb hdd still runs fine and i'm not generally in THAT much of a hurry (besides, at 1.5ghz, the cpu is likely to be the bottleneck of most things concerning actual performance), i decided that the cf card wasn't worth the expense and returned it to circuitcity. i feel that my money is better spent on battery/wifi/bluetooth for now. maybe next year i'll revisit this.

daniboun · #483 Post by **daniboun** » Tue Jul 29, 2008 11:03 am

dstrauss wrote:I know this is going to come across as naive and probably downright stupid, but are all of these benchmark concerns relative. I just ran the benchmark on the stock 60 gb hd and it is pathetic as well, even on the small file (4k) writes. In real life terms, how do all these various CF cards "feel"? Are they generally slower/faster in these areas:

Booting
Opening programs
Saving files to disk (in Word/Excel)

At any point did the system just seem to stall during any of these operations. The reason I ask, and I've already gotten great advice from several veterans here, is that I'm looking to go 16gb 300x for boot disk and 2 x 32gb 133x for storage (slave ide and pc card). I've noticed that the 8gb in the SD slot is a lot slower in copying files from the HD, but so long as it does this in the background and not slowing down my foreground operations, I'll take the ruggedness, quiet, and battery saving over pure speed (what am I saying, the stock HD is a snail already).

In general terms I'd say that 300X UDMA CompactFlash Cards are faster than any IDE HD 1.8. Booting takes only several seconds, OS is more responsive... Concerning fiability and power saving, you'll be winner as well. It's really worth while.

daniboun · #484 Post by **daniboun** » Tue Jul 29, 2008 11:07 am

UPDATE

Just tried to reinstalll Windows XP when formating my Transcend 300X with 64K blocksize (FAT32) but OS does not boot at all. It's the same with 32K Blocksize. No way snifffff

iThinkPad · #485 Post by **iThinkPad** » Tue Jul 29, 2008 11:51 am

You don't have to format the system to get the cluster size 64kb.

I did it on my X40 today with Acronis Disk Director 10 BUT my Transcend 300x is still slow as hell and I really don't know why...!

daniboun could you please give me ALL your specs and changes of your install?
what have you changed to get 50 MB/s?

dbregman I'm also interested in your specs and changes because you work with NTFS...!

thanks guys

Edit:
btw - how fast is your system with the original hdd?
mine is about 18/15 MB/s in read and write.

daniboun · #486 Post by **daniboun** » Tue Jul 29, 2008 1:34 pm

iThinkPad wrote:You don't have to format the system to get the cluster size 64kb.

I did it on my X40 today with Acronis Disk Director 10 BUT my Transcend 300x is still slow as hell and I really don't know why...!

daniboun could you please give me ALL your specs and changes of your install?
what have you changed to get 50 MB/s?

dbregman I'm also interested in your specs and changes because you work with NTFS...!

thanks guys

Edit:
btw - how fast is your system with the original hdd?
mine is about 18/15 MB/s in read and write.

I did not change anything. I'm just running under Windows Trust 2.5 SP3 which is lighter and optimised as I already said. I just disabled the Swap to avoid write cycle on CF.
I also tried with a NTFS partition and I got the same results. FAT32 just allows to restrict the OS to write on CF (less than NTFS).

You should check the UDMA mode of your card too... Mine is configured in UDMA mode 4 and can't go further. I tried to Bench the Transcend 300x with my external USB2 Temium card reader and results are a bit disappointing.

In other forums you can easily read some benchs reporting that the Transcend should run @ 40MB/40MB Write/read.

Check it out here :

番外付きで長くなってしまうが
SILICON POWER(シリコンパワー) 200倍、300倍kingmax 2GB SDC/2GBFE
Team Fusion Plus F102+ USB2.0 Ready boost対応
【PC型番】 IBM X40【チップセット】 Intel 855GME
【アダプタ型番】 DCT-CF18H
【OS】 Windows XP SP2
【転送モード】 CFのは2つ共 Ultra DMA Mode4
【インストール方法】クリーンインストール
【その他】この下駄、微妙にはみ出すので蓋がしまらない罠あり。
【ベンチマーク】　CrystalDiskMark 2.1 (C) 2007-2008 hiyohiyo
SILICON POWER 200倍 16GB
Sequential Read : 41.856 MB/s
Sequential Write : 11.583 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 41.535 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 2.856 MB/s
Random Read 4KB : 11.975 MB/s
Random Write 4KB : 0.032 MB/s
Test Size : 50 MB
Date : 2008/04/21 1:01:16

SILICON POWER 300倍 8GB
Sequential Read : 44.532 MB/s
Sequential Write : 34.750 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 44.533 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 14.723 MB/s
Random Read 4KB : 13.708 MB/s
Random Write 4KB : 0.187 MB/s
Test Size : 50 MB
Date : 2008/05/04 4:10:58

【PC型番】 ThinkPad X40 2371-1EJ (1GHz 768MB) 【チップセット】 855GME
【アダプタ型番】 44-20-C
【SD/CF型番(容量)】 Transcend TS8GCF266 (CF 8GB 266倍速)
【OS】 XP pro SP2
【転送モード】 UDMA4
【インストール方法】 CDからクリーンインストール
【その他】ファイルシステムはNTFS
【ベンチマーク】

--------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 1.0 (C) 2007 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/
--------------------------------------------------

Sequential Read : 40.949 MB/s
Sequential Write : 36.775 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 41.148 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 9.464 MB/s
Random Read 4KB : 14.389 MB/s
Random Write 4KB : 0.156 MB/s

Date : 2007/08/10 13:02:58

★ ★ ★ HDBENCH Ver 3.40 beta 6 (C)EP82改/かず ★ ★ ★
Read Write RRead RWrite Drive
39705 28731 29248 8358 C:\100MB

More results here :
http://www29.atwiki.jp/mobile_no_hdd/pa ... _mobilex=1

If you have the solultion ??? Thx

iThinkPad · #487 Post by **iThinkPad** » Tue Jul 29, 2008 1:42 pm

You should check the UDMA mode of your card too... Mince is configured in UDMA mode 4 and can't go further.

where can I check this?

iThinkPad · #488 Post by **iThinkPad** » Tue Jul 29, 2008 1:47 pm

I check the adapter and CF card on my old Samsung X10 - I hope it isn't faster than on my IBM X40 - this would suck big time...!

Edit:
[censored] - I get 50 and 26 read write on my Samsung X10 - it feels fast...!

What's wrong with my IBM X40...!

daniboun · #489 Post by **daniboun** » Tue Jul 29, 2008 2:13 pm

iThinkPad wrote:
You should check the UDMA mode of your card too... Mince is configured in UDMA mode 4 and can't go further.
where can I check this?

You can use HDTUNE and check the options and you'll get the informations about your disk. Thx

iThinkPad · #490 Post by **iThinkPad** » Tue Jul 29, 2008 3:55 pm

Now this is bad - my disk runs in Ultra DMA Mode 2.
That means

Maximum Transfer Rate (MB/s) 33.3 - not good...!
How can I change this?

Upgrade BIOS version and other internal stuff?

iThinkPad · #491 Post by **iThinkPad** » Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:51 pm

Guys

update your BIOS (2.08 ) and ThinkPad Embedded Controller Program (1.62 )...!

I get now 51MB/s read and 31MB/s write on my lovely IBM X40

Ultra DMA Mode 5...!

Yeah baby...!

kaotic504 · #492 Post by **kaotic504** » Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:10 pm

do we have enough info to update the wiki now?

Anyway, i have a 200x card, and i've seen others with a 233x and 300x cards, do you think the costs are worth it getting the faster and more expensive cards?

my only regret is not getting in on the 16gb 233x Sandisk III cards for the price of my Silicon Power 200x card. i wish some would buy my 8gb Silicon Power so i can get 16gb Sandisk.

sebtomato · #493 Post by **sebtomato** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 10:14 am

Hi,

I am happy to report on the conversion of a X40 from the 40GB HD (Hitachi) to a CF card (Transcend 300x).

Configuration:

Windows XP SP3
NTFS (default block), no compression
512 Mb RAM
BIOS (2.08 ) and Embedded Controller Program (1.62 )
Transcend 300x 8GB
Addonics CF IDE adapter AD44MIDE2CF
The usual tweaks to XP (indexing, last accessed file date, swap file etc)

Read performance (measured with HD Tune):

Min 20.1 MB/sec
Max 41.5 MB/sec
Average 39.9 MB/sec
0.3 ms access time

As you can see, this is significantly faster (at least twice faster) than the standard hard drive. This is even faster than the performance of the HD on my much newer Thinkpad T60!

Using the Transcend card with the Addonics adapter created no issues at all: the card was seen as a fixed drive automatically, and Windows could be installed the normal way, without specific drivers or changes. The card was seen automatically as UDMA 5.

Visible performance:

Windows boot time (from power on button pressed to desktop displayed): 18 sec (before: 41 sec)

Hibernation (512 Mb):
Save: 32 sec (before: 25 sec)
Restore: 15 sec (before 18 sec)

As expected, going to hibernation mode is slighly slower now, but restore is slighly quicker.

Starting an application (IE, Firefox 3, Wordpad): instant!

Conclusion: overall, the laptop is much faster/responsive with XP and quieter (fan does not go off as often, and no more clicking from HD)

I still need to resolve the small issue of the caddie. The card can be inserted in the HD slot fine (with some paper to hold the card vertically), without the original caddie, but then the small black door is only secured with one screw on one side and can move. I will remove the bottom caddie from the HD, and screw back the black door with bolts, so the solution will be better.

My final advice:

1) Get the Addonics adapter (dual cards)

I would strongly recommend against buying any other adapter than the Addonics, since most won't fit properly (IDE 1 pin the wrong side, so card has to be used upside down and no longer fits) or won't support UDMA. You can see many of those CF IDE adapters on eBay, cheaper than the Addonics one, but it will often bee a waste of money (very few have UDMA, and none have the IDE 1 pin in the right place).

2) Get the Transcend card. Anything else will probably create issues with fixed drive mode, UDMA or performance

3) Don't buy Sandisk Extreme IV cards from eBay, the vast majority are fake. If you pay much less than £45 ($90) for one, it is fake.

4) 8GB is more than enough for Windows XP SP3 and many applications. If you get the dual CF adapter, you can always buy another slower CF card.

Hope this is useful!

Seb

iThinkPad · #494 Post by **iThinkPad** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 12:46 pm

sebtomato wrote:
... Hope this is useful!

It is - thanks.

daniboun · #495 Post by **daniboun** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:21 am

sebtomato wrote:Hi,

I am happy to report on the conversion of a X40 from the 40GB HD (Hitachi) to a CF card (Transcend 300x).

Configuration:

Windows XP SP3
NTFS (default block), no compression
512 Mb RAM
BIOS (2.08 ) and Embedded Controller Program (1.62 )
Transcend 300x 8GB
Addonics CF IDE adapter AD44MIDE2CF
The usual tweaks to XP (indexing, last accessed file date, swap file etc)

Read performance (measured with HD Tune):

Min 20.1 MB/sec
Max 41.5 MB/sec
Average 39.9 MB/sec
0.3 ms access time

As you can see, this is significantly faster (at least twice faster) than the standard hard drive. This is even faster than the performance of the HD on my much newer Thinkpad T60!

Using the Transcend card with the Addonics adapter created no issues at all: the card was seen as a fixed drive automatically, and Windows could be installed the normal way, without specific drivers or changes. The card was seen automatically as UDMA 5.

Visible performance:

Windows boot time (from power on button pressed to desktop displayed): 18 sec (before: 41 sec)

Hibernation (512 Mb):
Save: 32 sec (before: 25 sec)
Restore: 15 sec (before 18 sec)

As expected, going to hibernation mode is slighly slower now, but restore is slighly quicker.

Starting an application (IE, Firefox 3, Wordpad): instant!

Conclusion: overall, the laptop is much faster/responsive with XP and quieter (fan does not go off as often, and no more clicking from HD)

I still need to resolve the small issue of the caddie. The card can be inserted in the HD slot fine (with some paper to hold the card vertically), without the original caddie, but then the small black door is only secured with one screw on one side and can move. I will remove the bottom caddie from the HD, and screw back the black door with bolts, so the solution will be better.

My final advice:

1) Get the Addonics adapter (dual cards)

I would strongly recommend against buying any other adapter than the Addonics, since most won't fit properly (IDE 1 pin the wrong side, so card has to be used upside down and no longer fits) or won't support UDMA. You can see many of those CF IDE adapters on eBay, cheaper than the Addonics one, but it will often bee a waste of money (very few have UDMA, and none have the IDE 1 pin in the right place).

2) Get the Transcend card. Anything else will probably create issues with fixed drive mode, UDMA or performance

3) Don't buy Sandisk Extreme IV cards from eBay, the vast majority are fake

4) 8GB is more than enough for Windows XP SP3 and many applications. If you get the dual CF adapter, you can always buy another slower CF card.

Hope this is useful!

Seb

Nice review

Addonics adapter seems to be one of the best... But I keep on saying that the PACF18H is the only one wich is really designed for the IBM X40/41 and also supports UDMA. This adapter has the same size as the Hitachi 1.8 drive and fits perfectly.

daniboun · #496 Post by **daniboun** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 5:16 am

iThinkPad wrote:Guys update your BIOS (2.08 ) and ThinkPad Embedded Controller Program (1.62 )...!
I get now 51MB/s read and 31MB/s write on my lovely IBM X40 Ultra DMA Mode 5...!

Yeah baby...!

Happy you found the solution

I did the same and got the same results

But my card runs @UDMA Mode 4 instead of 5. Makes no difference anyway everything rolls !!!!!!!

sebtomato · #497 Post by **sebtomato** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 5:38 am

daniboun wrote: Addonics adapter seems to be one of the best... But I keep on saying that the PACF18H is the only one wich is really designed for the IBM X40/41 and also supports UDMA. This adapter has the same size as the Hitachi 1.8 drive and fits perfectly.

Sorry, I hadn't seen your comments about the PACF18H card before my post. It seems indeed to be a good alternative to the Addonics adapter, and also available in the UK (the Addonics one is a pain to get in Europe at reasonable price). The only drawback I guess would be to have only 1 CF slot as opposed to two on the Addonics.

I have been mainly looking at the adapters available on eBay, and I don't think I saw the one you mentioned (maybe some market opportunity there!).

Regarding it fitting perfectly, do you still need something to support the card inside the slot (I need some paper under the Addonics one, else it is not very straight vertically). Does this resolve the issue of the caddie/hatch? Can you screw the card to the black hatch?

Thanks,
Seb

daniboun · #498 Post by **daniboun** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 5:58 am

sebtomato wrote:
daniboun wrote: Addonics adapter seems to be one of the best... But I keep on saying that the PACF18H is the only one wich is really designed for the IBM X40/41 and also supports UDMA. This adapter has the same size as the Hitachi 1.8 drive and fits perfectly.
Sorry, I hadn't seen your comments about the PACF18H card before my post. It seems indeed to be a good alternative to the Addonics adapter, and also available in the UK (the Addonics one is a pain to get in Europe at reasonable price). The only drawback I guess would be to have only 1 CF slot as opposed to two on the Addonics.

I have been mainly looking at the adapters available on eBay, and I don't think I saw the one you mentioned (maybe some market opportunity there!).

Regarding it fitting perfectly, do you still need something to support the card inside the slot (I need some paper under the Addonics one, else it is not very straight vertically). Does this resolve the issue of the caddie/hatch? Can you screw the card to the black hatch?

Thanks,
Seb

I bought mine in UK for about 27 euros, delivery took only 2 days

This adapter is provided with 4 little plastic supports to avoid any space into the X40's slot. But I prefered to put a piece of paper instead because it's easier to remove the adapter when needed.

Hope it will help.

aceo07 · #499 Post by **aceo07** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 8:58 pm

daniboun wrote:
aceo07 wrote:I'm curious about a standard benchmark of the Transcend 300x 16GB and the 8GB. I have the 8GB, but I wonder if the 16GB is faster.
Bench your card you'll know

haha. True. I actually was using Ubuntu when I posted that. So it's hard to have a standard benchmark if nobody else has the same configuration.

I just installed Windows XP so I'll give it a try tonight.

aceo07 · #500 Post by **aceo07** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 11:34 pm

CrystalDiskMark or the CF tech seems to give different results based on space left on the partition/disk. I'm using Windows XP Pro SP2. Clean install and then testing with CrystalDiskMark 2.1.

TRANSCEND 300X 8GB on ADDONICS DUAL CF IDE Adapter.
I have 2 partitions:
C: NTFS 700MB default blocks - 690MB free
E: NTFS 1.2GB 4K blocks - 540MB free

Code: Select all

Windows XP - NTFS [500MB Test] E: drive
		  READ	WRITE
Seq	 44.44	10.35
512K	44.60	11.86
4K	  13.64	0.210

Windows XP - NTFS [100MB Test] E: Drive
		 READ	 WRITE
Seq	 44.86	37.54
512K	44.93	16.52
4K	  16.02	0.215

Windows XP - NTFS [50MB Test] E: drive
		 READ	 WRITE
Seq	 44.55	35.30
512K	44.26	15.59
4K	  15.74	0.207

Windows XP - NTFS [500MB Test] C: Drive
		 READ	 WRITE
Seq	 45.37	39.42
512K	45.11	17.08
4K	  14.87	0.213

Windows XP - NTFS [100MB Test] C: Drive
		 READ	 WRITE
Seq	 45.36	39.27
512K	45.00	17.09
4K	  14.87	0.206

Windows XP - NTFS [50MB Test] C: Drive
		 READ	 WRITE
Seq	 45.22	38.11
512K	44.70	15.76
4K	  14.70	0.213

As you can see from the results, it seems like the write speed drops a lot during the 500MB test on drive E:, which only had 540MB of space left. During the test, I assume 500MB is used up, leaving only 40MB left. On the other tests, the speed doesn't change too much.

daniboun · #501 Post by **daniboun** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:44 am

aceo07 wrote:CrystalDiskMark or the CF tech seems to give different results based on space left on the partition/disk. I'm using Windows XP Pro SP2. Clean install and then testing with CrystalDiskMark 2.1.

TRANSCEND 300X 8GB on ADDONICS DUAL CF IDE Adapter.
I have 2 partitions:
C: NTFS 700MB default blocks - 690MB free
E: NTFS 1.2GB 4K blocks - 540MB free
Code: Select all
Windows XP - NTFS [500MB Test] E: drive
		  READ	WRITE
Seq	 44.44	10.35
512K	44.60	11.86
4K	  13.64	0.210

Windows XP - NTFS [100MB Test] E: Drive
		 READ	 WRITE
Seq	 44.86	37.54
512K	44.93	16.52
4K	  16.02	0.215

Windows XP - NTFS [50MB Test] E: drive
		 READ	 WRITE
Seq	 44.55	35.30
512K	44.26	15.59
4K	  15.74	0.207

Windows XP - NTFS [500MB Test] C: Drive
		 READ	 WRITE
Seq	 45.37	39.42
512K	45.11	17.08
4K	  14.87	0.213

Windows XP - NTFS [100MB Test] C: Drive
		 READ	 WRITE
Seq	 45.36	39.27
512K	45.00	17.09
4K	  14.87	0.206

Windows XP - NTFS [50MB Test] C: Drive
		 READ	 WRITE
Seq	 45.22	38.11
512K	44.70	15.76
4K	  14.70	0.213
As you can see from the results, it seems like the write speed drops a lot during the 500MB on drive E:, which only had 540MB of space left. On the other tests, the speed doesn't change too much.

Interesting indeed... Results seem to be very relative, depending on the partition size, blocks, optimised OS etc...
I wonder if the 8GB Transcend 300x performs better than the 16GB one but I guess it does.

muscleflex · #502 Post by **muscleflex** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 6:29 am

daniboun wrote:
Nice review
Addonics adapter seems to be one of the best... But I keep on saying that the PACF18H is the only one wich is really designed for the IBM X40/41 and also supports UDMA. This adapter has the same size as the Hitachi 1.8 drive and fits perfectly.

i'm gonna order this adapter tonight and have a go at this mod

muscleflex · #503 Post by **muscleflex** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 6:48 am

anyone using a 32gig 133x card like this?
http://www.7dayshop.com/catalog/product ... _id=104376

or do you have to stick with 300x speed?

muscleflex · #504 Post by **muscleflex** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 7:03 am

Ebay item like this - would they work for the X41?
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll? ... 0049686549

Admin edit: Shortened URL to prevent horizontal scrolling

denisky · #505 Post by **denisky** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 7:11 am

How do you guys put the CF along with CF-IDE adapter inside the machine? It is smaller than IDE HDD, right?

daniboun · #506 Post by **daniboun** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 8:45 am

denisky wrote:How do you guys put the CF along with CF-IDE adapter inside the machine? It is smaller than IDE HDD, right?

Addonics and PACF18H fit perfectly inside IBM X40/41. It's like the original hard disk > just plug the 44 pins inside the slot...

take a look here :

http://vort.org/2008/02/21/converting-a ... -to-flash/

daniboun · #507 Post by **daniboun** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 8:48 am

muscleflex wrote:Ebay item like this - would they work for the X41?
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll? ... 0049686549

This one will not fit on you IBM X41... You'd better take either the Addonics or the PACF18H, designed for 1.8 slot. They both support UDMA and True Ide mode.

aceo07 · #508 Post by **aceo07** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:36 am

Update on my results. I used compression the E: drive (Windows XP drive with 540MB free space) and got around 620MB free space. I performed the CrystalDiskMark 500MB test and got improved scores that are similar to my other tests.

Compression on the drive is not the reason for improvement in score. I still believe it is the extra free space. (I have tried enabling compression on another NTFS drive and the results are the same as without compression.) Perhaps Windows XP is doing extra backgrounds tasks when it detects the space has gone low, therefore ruining the test results.

daniboun, how much free space did you have on the drive when you were performing your tests?

aceo07 · #509 Post by **aceo07** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:39 am

muscleflex wrote:anyone using a 32gig 133x card like this?
http://www.7dayshop.com/catalog/product ... _id=104376

or do you have to stick with 300x speed?

I believe another user tried the 32gb Transcend 133X card as their main drive. They posted their results in this thread. They did not like the slow speed. For the operating system drive, it is highly recommended to use as fast of a CF card as you can get. For storage space, you can go slower. I am also considering the 32gb Transcend for storage.

dstrauss · #510 Post by **dstrauss** » Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:39 am

Confused about Transcend 133x performance:

Still waiting for the Addonics adapter, but I've been testing the Transcend 32gb/133x data drive in the PC Card slot adapter, and with the exception of video files, it is every bit as peppy (if not faster) than the Hitachi HD in file transfers and operations. Small (under 8k) and large (3gb ACC) transfer quickly to the card, and open in the programs. The only disappointment is video files (iTunes music videos and movies) which stutter and stumble...but this is from the PC Card slot - notoriously low performing in its own right...more to come as we tie to the IDE port...

Has anyone tried an SSD in the X41? PICS

Report on CF conversion

Re: Report on CF conversion

Re: Report on CF conversion

Re: Report on CF conversion

Re: Report on CF conversion

Re: Report on CF conversion

Who is online