I was checking out Solid-State Hard Drive reviews at http://www.runcore.com

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FloAm4fFC8

I was wondering why the manufacturers aren't making SATA III or SATA 6Gbps? That's the least they could do for the price they're charging.

I'm looking forward to next generation computers in general with USB 3.0, SATA III and PCI 3.

I'm not sure where current memory design is at, but I'd imagine that it's still a problem of having low backup power consumption and speed in the one chip. Dynamic memory is fast but needs ma and constant refreshing to maintain it's contents - no good for hdd use. Static memory only needs pico power and no refreshing to maintain it's contents but is much slower.

Slower?
Than what?
Slower than seeking in HDD?
Static ram is the best for replacement of hdd, but of course needs continous power for keep the content.
This is high risk, thats the problem....

Janos

Hi, I make no comparison to hdd, only static to dynamic to offer OP a reason why ssd's are currently not as fast as would seem theoretically possible, not to mention the algorithms ssd's need to run for a variety of reasons, which also constrains the 'raw' bandwidth of solid state memory.