Aw, too bad. 😞
Personally, I think that true RAM disks are principally superior to SSDs.
Even had an argument over this with a friend who's a fan of modern tech.
I guess you can't argue with these guys. 🤷♂️
Explaining that an old Dual-Ported RAM or SRAM has fundamental advantages when it comes to access times doesn't matter to them.
They will come up with lots of explanations why modern DDR5 RAM is faster than CPU etc. etc., so that the CPU can't keep up, anyway.
Or that SSDs are quicker than the chipset, anyway. Things like this.
It's hard to express that an Atari ST with TOS in EPROM reacts quicker than a modern Ryzen with 16 cores and an NVME SSD:
If you press a key on an Atari ST, the character is faster displayed on screen than on a modern high-end PC.
Anyway, to me, the low latency and the direct or close connection to the processor are more important to MB/s.
Especially if an OS with thousands of open files is running.
Each file operation is near instant on a RAM disk, but not an SSDs.
"Near", because the HDD driver and filesystem are still an overhead.
When I'm running a software RAM disk on a 286, writes and reads are near instant. Snap!
Not so much with SSDs. They do have a little lag, can "stutter" while thinking/while busy..
Akin to CF cards.
"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel
//My video channel//