Linux

9782 readers

943 users here now

A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)

Also, check out:

Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Ategon@programming.dev

anzo@programming.dev

dwraf_of_ignorance@programming.dev

What is the performance difference between live booting from a USB pen, and installed on an eMMC drive? (lemmy.ca)

submitted 1 month ago by thatonecoder@lemmy.ca to c/linux@programming.dev

13 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I am not quite ready to switch to a GNU/Linux yet, but I have live booted Linux Mint Xfce yesterday, with most things working, but much worse for launching times, etc. Would it be any different if I installed it on my eMMC drive? Since they are both based on NAND flash memory, I am clueless about it.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] MagicShel@lemmy.zip 11 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

Probably depends on the speed of your usb pen and port. If you know for a fact that everything USB side is 3.1, USB will be faster. Otherwise eMMC will be faster. If everything is USB3.1 gen 2, USB looks to be around 3x as fast. Gen 1 is about 25% faster.

What I found in a quick search:

eMMC: 400MB/s
USB 3.1 gen 1: 500MB/s
USB 3.1 gen 2: 1250MB/s

If any part of the USB chain is 2 or lower, it's slower.

[–] traceur201@piefed.social 3 points 1 month ago

I suspect the usb storage has a much worse or at least much more variable latency profile. Control frames on usb3 are a whole .125ms apart

load more comments (3 replies)