Personally, I'd prefer a disk obey power state requests from the OS
Added NTFS compression and your SF-2200 compression numbers to my compression curves charts. I intend to do the same with the LTT-less SF-1200 when I get it![]()
You obviously can't add my C Volume and D Volume data, so that's been made to a trendline so that it's bridged between NTFS and RAR-fastest. NTFS was incapable of compressing 67%, 67% No Dedup, and 101%; file size didn't even change one byte.
Based on 8% and 25% settings, it looks like the SF-2200 is actually more powerful than NTFS compression
![]()
Bookmarks