Just bear in mind that if using an SSD then the speed limit will probably then be the GPU hardware acceleration. Having done some testing I found that on multiple systems the hardware GPU acceleration is the same for both the GTX 1060 and the GTX 1070, and from what others have posted on here the GTX 1080 is no faster so all 3 appear to have the same GPU hardware acceleration speed, the read speeds from the SSD's being used by CloneBD seemed to max out around 90-95MB/s so at the moment we seem to have hit the limit, although I have to say that limit is very fast.
Forgot to consider what Adbear is saying here about CloneBD max-es. Maybe for the Intel h/w acceleration I am using, 130 is the limit.
I can believe that because when I start the conversion, the fps rate rapidly increases to 180 and hits a wall, plateaus there for a bit then decreases until it stabilizes at 130.
And this is with or without SSD.
But running CloneBD on my desktop, which cannot do hardware acceleration, I also see absolutely no difference in using or not using SSD. Exactly the same performance there as well.
@Chevron, if you recall I ran a file copy test on the laptop and 60 Mps was the max I could get whether using SSD or not.
Do you think it's a coincidence that is the max for a USB 2.0 connection?
I triple checked and both the SSD and the normal HD were directly connected to USB 3.0 ports on the laptop. So I dunno...
I also ran a file copy test on the desktop, which has an older but beefier CPU.
Copying a 42G file, the transfer rate was in the low 90's with normal HD and 99 - 100 with the SSD.
Not really a large difference.
I do notice though that the rate kind of acts like its banging up against a wall when using SSD. It reaches 100 then falls back to 99 --- repeatedly.
Again, I'm using USB 3.0 ports, so I don't know what a 100 Mps max would represent.
Appreciate any ideas anyone has on if there's something I'm doing wrong here....
T