Related
I ordered a Shield K1 Tablet for my son and the one apprehension I have is that it only includes 16GB of internal memory. Nvidia has already pushed out a 6.0 update for the device so adopting an SD card for internal storage seems like a logical option. My question is around the performance hit for doing so. I'm considering buying a 64GB Class 10/U3 SD card with write R/W speeds of up to 95/90 MB/s. I've googled around a bit and found some articles discussing the theoretical performance of adopted storage, but no actual testing.
Does anybody have experience with adoptable storage in Marshmallow and/or links to benchmarks? Any help is appreciated.
I have an oldish phone and I used a 64GiB class 10 /UHS card.
The performance is very bad. When formatted to be adopted storage, the card is encrypted, and all encryption/descryption happens in software, at least for ARMv7 CPUs (I'm still not sure what happens with 64bit ARMv8, different sources seem to post different things on that).
The app "Disk speed test" reports 18MB/s write and 3.8 MB/s read for this card. The phone is galaxy s4 mini. Apps placed on that storage are unusably slow.
From ancient laptops to high-end gaming rigs, Remix OS supports them all! What hardware do you run Remix on?
Here's mine
Desktop PC:
Intel Core i7-5930K (6-cores, 15MB Cache, Overclocked up to 3.9 GHz)
32GB DDR4 (8GB x 4)
128GB SSD + 2*2TB SATA
NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X with 12GB
1500 Watt Power Supply
LG 34" 34UC97 curved monitor
Dell Inspiron 1121 [email protected]
Dual boot with Windows 7 64bit
4GB Ram, running great!
Acer AspireOne ZG5, 1GB Ram
Dual boot with Win7 32bit
Testing...
Acer p3, and it works great! No freezes or stucks.
Surface Pro 2
Inte Corel i5 2.30 GHz x4
Micro Center 16 GB MicroSD on Lexar USB3.0 "Blue" MicroSD Reader
I do a nice swap trick when I get the searching for Android x86 I remove the MicroSD card from USB and insert it into the built-in reader so I can enjoy the use of the official docking station. Only drawback is that the Ethernet port doesn't operate with RemixOS and WiFi from the tablet keeps dropping.
me,
CPU : amd 8350
GPU : radeon 7970
MoBo : Asrock extreme3
atuntu bench : 87k max average:angel:
Just on a dell inspiron core 2 duo with 4gig ram and a 500 gig hd. installed to the HD running as only OS.
rooted and with google play I must say I like it.
Will give this laptop to one of the kids it's perfect for that
ZOTAC IONITX-A-U Atom 330 1.6GHz Dual-Core NVIDIA ION Mini ITX Motherboard/CPU Combo
An installed version (32 GB SSD) of Remix OS beta runs successfully on a Lenovo T400 (CPU: Intel Core(TM)2 Duo P8400, Intel Mobile 4 Series Chipset Integrated Graphics Controller). Videos are shown with BSPlayer, Whatsapp runs, Skype starts and stops one second later - Problem with the graphics?
Older 32Bit IBM/Lenovo notebooks do not run with Remix OS beta 32Bit (2016-03-01): T40, T42, T43, R51. They run until the prompt of the root terminal, but do not switch into graphics mode needed for the rest of the booting process.
A Lenovo T61 runs with Remix OS beta 32bit, but not absolutely stable.
ASUS A46CB-WX024D laptop
Intel Core i5-3317U (1.7 GHz)
Intel HD 4000 and NVIDIA GeForce 740M (Optimus)
4GB RAM, 500GB HDD
Works great, with AnTuTu score of 125k. Even multitouch on the touchpad works, including gestures, but works terribly with the file manager.
Toshiba Satellite L55
i5 5th gen 2.40hz
8gb ram
1tb HDD split into three partitions 450gb for Windows, 500gb for Linux Mint, and 32gb for RemixOS on an ext4 format.
I also have a 16gb USB drive for other computers.
Dell Inspiron 7548 with UHD Display
i7 5500U 3.0GHz
16GB RAM
32GB Sandisk USB 3 Flashdrive with UEFI boot
Works amazingly well. No WiFi After sleep, however.
Acer R14 Convertible, Triple Boot (Windows 10, Ubuntu, Remix OS), Core I7, 1 TeraByte drive, 8 GB Ram.
About 18 months ago I tried to install Androidx86 directly onto my sole laptopn, an Acer Aspire 1410 (2011 I think), single core netbook, but a decent one at that.
I'm pretty dran good at making/breaking things, but this time I screwed up and lost my Windows OS, with Android never working. Then life's dramas took over, and fixing it became low-priority.
But I needed a laptop again and, right on time, Remix OS drops, and right now I have my old faithful laptop back, running my favourite OS (I really just do not need Windows anymore).
Sadly, I'm limited to running it off USB2, and I've not found a clever way of installing it to the HDD without an initial copy of Windows to work off.
Use Universal USB Formatter with a non-Linux installation method install to local drive then use rmxtools to expand the data image to whatever size you want. Then you Acer boot to RMX OS.
Lenovo IdeaPad Z710 Laptop
CPU i7-4700MQ
Memory 16GB Crucial Ballistix Sport
Graphics Card Intel® HD Graphics 4600
Dual booted with Windows 10.
Intel 730 SERIES, 240 GB, SSD, windows 10 /
Remix is on a second SSD, / Samsung 850 EVO, 500GB
my laptop
System Manufacturer ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC.
System Model G751JT
System Type x64-based PC
System SKU ASUS-NotebookSKU
Processor Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4710HQ CPU @ 2.50GHz, 2494 Mhz, 4 Core(s), 8 Logical Processor(s)
BIOS Version/Date American Megatrends Inc. G751JT.207, 4/24/2015
SMBIOS Version 2.7
Embedded Controller Version 255.255
BIOS Mode UEFI
Adapter Description NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M
Adapter RAM (1,073,741,824) bytes
Driver Version 10.18.13.6175
Resolution 1920 x 1080 x 60 hertz
Having trouble booting. its booted beta 2 sucsessfully twice and now nothing just hangs...
cant; boot from usb stick. cant; find it and the folder it mounts normally
just keeps trying to detect androidx86...........
I try to use it on my Acer Aspire Switch 10e, aka "sw3-013 11hm"
atom z3735f quad core 1.33
2gb ram
intel hd graphics
sd card reader
1 usb 3 port on the Keyboard dock
it should be some of the best machine to use this windowed android experience, except right now it is a pain in the ass to make it work with bigger space than standard 4gb data img, because it is one of those 32bit uefi/32bit windows on 64bit capable system...
what doesn't work (the most important first, less important at the end):
sound (realtek)
full power management (sees battery and consumption but not seeing charge, and no sleep)
bluetooth (realtek)
gyro (no rotation)
Lenovo G40-30
Pentium N3530
DDR3 8GB
SSD Samsung EVO 840 500GB
VGA Intel HD
Wifi Realtek RTL8723BE
LAN Realtek PCIe GBE
Audio Relatek HD
---
My laptop wifi often disconnected, must connect manually. Some hard crashes.
surface pro 3 i3 4gb 64gb
I bought a used Dell 3010 Chromebox. It came with 2gb of RAM. The CPU is the Intel Celeron 2955U (2M Cache, 1.40 GHz) and it had a 16gb SSD.
I had been using an old Dell 1545 laptop with CloudReady loaded. The old laptop had 4gb of ram, an Intel Core 2 Duo T9500 CPU and 120gb SSD drive. After now using a real Chrome OS system on the Chromebox, I can say that the CloudReady experience is very very similar to the genuine Chrome OS system.
In using the Dell Chromebox, there seemed to be some lags between clicking on a link and display of the webpage.
The Chromebox, with 2gb of RAM, seem to hesitate when starting new operations.
I added another 2gb of RAM to the empty second RAM slot. The Chromebox now has 4gb of RAM. The upgraded Chromebox seems much faster and more responsive. I would recommend upping any Chrome OS system that is upgradeable to at least 4gb of RAM.
I have also upgraded the 16gb M.2 SSD to 32gb just to have more local storage for a documents and music.
Yesterday I learned about a Chrome utility called "SYSTEM". I loaded it from the Chrome store.
The SYSTEM utility shows RAM usage.
When I open several tabs (2 to 4), the Chrome OS system is using 3gb to 3.5gb with available RAM at 1gb or 0.5gb.
So it appears that a Chromebook/Chromebox needs more than 2gb of RAM or will use more than 2gb of RAM for simple tasks.
I have ordered a 4gb SODIMM and will see if the RAM usage goes up with 6gb of available RAM (with a 2gb SODIMM and a 4gb SODIMM lnstalled).
Finally I ran Octane 2.0 on the Dell 3010 Chromebox (Intel Celeron 2955U CPU. 4gb RAM and 32gb M.2 SSD). It's connected through an HDMI connection to a Dell E2414H monitor. Resolution 1600x900. I'm running this resolution to get larger fonts on menus. 1920x1080 is just too small for me.
The Octane score is 12436.
After installing a 4gb SODIMM alongside the 2gb SODIMM, for a total of 6gb of ram, the SYSTEM app reports that the Dell Chromebox is pretty consistently using 2.5gb to 3.5 gb of memory.
Two good Chrome apps that let you monitor memory usage are the apps "System" and "Cog".
The Chromebox uses...
**RAM: 2gb, 4gb or 8gb in any combination up to a total of 16gb.
DDR3L PC3-12800 DDR3-1600MHz non-ECC Unbuffered CL11 204-Pin SoDimm 1.35V Low Voltage.
**SSD Card: 16gb, 32gb, 64gb or 128gb
42mm SATA III (6G) M.2 2242 NGFF SSD
**Wifi:
My Dell Chromebox 3010 uses AC wifi. The wifi card is a dual band Intel AC-7260 with Bluetooth 4.0. This AC wifi card would also probably be supported in the Asus Chromebox, which ships with N wifi.
Thanks for the info, I'm in the market for my first Chromebook and was wondering about this. Most of the filters are for either 4, 8, or 16GB; so would you recommend 8 at this point?
Hi guys. I am thinking about V30, but want to find out what the storage speed is. I use AndroBench app from Play Store and run "Micro" test only. This shows me MB/s of the storage. As far as I know, the 500+MB is for UFS 2.0, 700+MB is UFS 2.1
Could any of you that have the device, ran the benchmark and tell me if the storage is USF 2.0 or 2.1
Here you go. Not fully getting what you want but here results
Charkatak said:
Hi guys. I am thinking about V30, but want to find out what the storage speed is. I use AndroBench app from Play Store and run "Micro" test only. This shows me MB/s of the storage. As far as I know, the 500+MB is for UFS 2.0, 700+MB is UFS 2.1
Could any of you that have the device, ran the benchmark and tell me if the storage is USF 2.0 or 2.1
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As written Here UFS 2.0 has maximum speed close to 500MB/s, UFS2.1 has it close to 800MB/s.
In that thread there are also some terminal commands to find serial number of internal memory in order to establish if is UFS 2.0 or not (just google the number)
lg3FTW said:
Here you go. Not fully getting what you want but here results
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting... For example I ran LG G5 test and it showed the reading speed as 418MB or so and the other #s I don't remember.
Killua96 said:
As written Here UFS 2.0 has maximum speed close to 500MB/s, UFS2.1 has it close to 800MB/s.
In that thread there are also some terminal commands to find serial number of internal memory in order to establish if is UFS 2.0 or not (just google the number)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right. I have seen this or similar thread when I bought my Galaxy S8 in the summer. Now since V30 is out, I just wanted to see if the speeds of storage are fast or not. I also had HTC U11 as well and reading speed was 760MB or more, don't remember exactly. U11 was much faster when installing and updating apps, it was twice as fast than my S8.
lg3FTW said:
Here you go. Not fully getting what you want but here results
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could you run these? Or some of them?
Both the LG V30 and V30+ have Toshiba UFS 2.1 (THGAF4G9N4LBAIRB) internal storage
LG's press release:
http://www.lgnewsroom.com/2017/08/l...ier-with-premium-cinematography-capabilities/
Memory:
V30: 4GB LPDDR4x RAM / 64GB UFS 2.1 ROM / MicroSD (up to 2TB)
V30+: 4GB LPDDR4x RAM / 128GB UFS 2.1 ROM / MicroSD (up to 2TB)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Other sites even give the manufacturer and component number:
https://www.androidheadlines.com/2017/10/lg-v30-review-ultimate-creativity-tool.html
Inside is a Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 chipset with Adreno 540 GPU, 4GB of LPDDR4X ram and either 64GB or 128GB of Toshiba UFS 2.1 (THGAF4G9N4LBAIRB) internal storage, all with microSD card support for expandable storage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This 6-inch display features a Quad-HD+ (1440 x 2880, 538 PPI) resolution 18:9 panel with nearly zero bezels all around, and is covered in Gorilla Glass 5. It’s also both Dolby Vision and HDR10 compliant. Inside is a Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 chipset with Adreno 540 GPU, 4GB of LPDDR4X ram and either 64GB or 128GB of Toshiba UFS 2.1 (THGAF4G9N4LBAIRB) internal storage, all with microSD card support for expandable storage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As it’s pushing the same resolution screen as the G6 with a processor and GPU boost, it’s pretty obvious why the phone feels so blazing fast all the time. Combine this with Toshiba UFS 2.1 (THGAF4G9N4LBAIRB) storage and you’ll quickly understand that LG has outfitted the V30 with the highest end components available right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Even the Toshiba UFS 2.1 storage inside is a perfect match for Samsung’s best UFS 2.1 storage, which is used in most flagships now, and averages out just as fast as those chips. See the results of the benchmark suite we run for each phone, including 3DMark Slingshot, GeekBench 4, AnTuTu V6 and Futuremark’s PCMark internal storage test.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
https://www.anandtech.com/show/11789/hands-on-with-the-lg-v30
Under the hood, the V30 is powered by Qualcomm's Snapdragon 835, with LG using a heatpipe to assist in cooling. This is paired with 4 GB of LPDDR4X, and either 64GB or 128GB of UFS 2.1 storage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ChazzMatt said:
Both the LG V30 and V30+ have Toshiba UFS 2.1 (THGAF4G9N4LBAIRB) internal storage
LG's press release:
http://www.lgnewsroom.com/2017/08/l...ier-with-premium-cinematography-capabilities/
Other sites even give the manufacturer and component number:
https://www.androidheadlines.com/2017/10/lg-v30-review-ultimate-creativity-tool.html
This 6-inch display features a Quad-HD+ (1440 x 2880, 538 PPI) resolution 18:9 panel with nearly zero bezels all around, and is covered in Gorilla Glass 5. It’s also both Dolby Vision and HDR10 compliant. Inside is a Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 chipset with Adreno 540 GPU, 4GB of LPDDR4X ram and either 64GB or 128GB of Toshiba UFS 2.1 (THGAF4G9N4LBAIRB) internal storage, all with microSD card support for expandable storage.
As it’s pushing the same resolution screen as the G6 with a processor and GPU boost, it’s pretty obvious why the phone feels so blazing fast all the time. Combine this with Toshiba UFS 2.1 (THGAF4G9N4LBAIRB) storage and you’ll quickly understand that LG has outfitted the V30 with the highest end components available right now.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/11789/hands-on-with-the-lg-v30
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You do go overboard sometimes, but man, you're beyond an over achiever. ?
You help a lot of people. ?
I want to have a new micro SD card ready to go when I pick up my V30+ next week. There are some decent deals for 128GB cards at BestBuy and Amazon. I have tried searching for the info but haven't had any luck finding the maximum read and write speeds the LG V30's micro SD slot is capable of.
Samsung EVO Plus 128GB - BestBuy
Samsung EVO Select 128GB - Amazon
They are essentially the exact same card, just different branding due to when they were manufactured. Same specs and all but the EVO Select seems to be the newer of the two where the EVO Plus has been around since 2015. If the V30's micro SD card slot isn't capable of 100MB's read and 90MB's write, then I may as well go for something cheaper and slightly slower and save $7.
SanDisk Ultra Plus 128GB - BestBuy
Is anyone aware of what the maximum capabilities of the V30's micro SD slot is capable of? Is there a way to test this that someone wouldn't mind testing and posting their results?
jcsww said:
Is anyone aware of what the maximum capabilities of the V30's micro SD slot is capable of? Is there a way to test this that someone wouldn't mind testing and posting their results?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Somebody did that a few weeks ago, I'll see if I can find the post.
EDIT
I was mistaken. It was the internal storage read/write speeds they tested.
V30 Internal storage speed?
https://forum.xda-developers.com/lg-v30/help/v30-internal-storage-speed-t3687990
They were trying to determine whether the LG V30/V30+ had UFS 2.0 or 2.1. It has UFS 2.1. (Earlier this year, Samsung shipped some S8 phones with both standards -- the Snapdragon S8 got 2.0 while the Exynos S8 got 2.1, while all chipset versions of the S8+ got 2.1.)
But several websites have done thorough reviews and have stated what's inside the V30/V30+, including exact components...
ChazzMatt said:
Both the LG V30 and V30+ have Toshiba UFS 2.1 (THGAF4G9N4LBAIRB) internal storage
LG's press release:
http://www.lgnewsroom.com/2017/08/l...ier-with-premium-cinematography-capabilities/
Memory:
V30: 4GB LPDDR4x RAM / 64GB UFS 2.1 ROM / MicroSD (up to 2TB)
V30+: 4GB LPDDR4x RAM / 128GB UFS 2.1 ROM / MicroSD (up to 2TB)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Other sites even give the manufacturer and component number:
https://www.androidheadlines.com/2017/10/lg-v30-review-ultimate-creativity-tool.html
Inside is a Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 chipset with Adreno 540 GPU, 4GB of LPDDR4X ram and either 64GB or 128GB of Toshiba UFS 2.1 (THGAF4G9N4LBAIRB) internal storage, all with microSD card support for expandable storage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This 6-inch display features a Quad-HD+ (1440 x 2880, 538 PPI) resolution 18:9 panel with nearly zero bezels all around, and is covered in Gorilla Glass 5. It’s also both Dolby Vision and HDR10 compliant. Inside is a Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 chipset with Adreno 540 GPU, 4GB of LPDDR4X ram and either 64GB or 128GB of Toshiba UFS 2.1 (THGAF4G9N4LBAIRB) internal storage, all with microSD card support for expandable storage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As it’s pushing the same resolution screen as the G6 with a processor and GPU boost, it’s pretty obvious why the phone feels so blazing fast all the time. Combine this with Toshiba UFS 2.1 (THGAF4G9N4LBAIRB) storage and you’ll quickly understand that LG has outfitted the V30 with the highest end components available right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Even the Toshiba UFS 2.1 storage inside is a perfect match for Samsung’s best UFS 2.1 storage, which is used in most flagships now, and averages out just as fast as those chips. See the results of the benchmark suite we run for each phone, including 3DMark Slingshot, GeekBench 4, AnTuTu V6 and Futuremark’s PCMark internal storage test.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
https://www.anandtech.com/show/11789/hands-on-with-the-lg-v30
Under the hood, the V30 is powered by Qualcomm's Snapdragon 835, with LG using a heatpipe to assist in cooling. This is paired with 4 GB of LPDDR4X, and either 64GB or 128GB of UFS 2.1 storage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just used the A1 SD card speed test app. LG V30 - Samsung 128GB Evo Select formatted as a 'removable' storage device - did the standard 4GB size write / read test twice without closing apps etc (so bit of a real life test) and once did reboot (waited 5 minutes before launching), ran the accurate test (does write, then reboot again with another 5 minute wait, then does read):
Test 1
Read - 64.01 MB/s
Write - 35.38 MB/s
Test 2
Read - 65.25 MB/s
Write - 33.13 MB/s
Test 3 (accurate test)
Read - 60.56 MB/s
Write - 37.63 MB/s
Based on other benchmarks I have seen for this SD card (~95 MB.s read and ~70 MB/s write), it does appear the V30 is not able to get full speed out of it.
And just for 'fun' here is what the internal memory was capable of in this app (only ran the 4GB test once):
Read - 524.87 MB/s
Write - 199.30 MB/s
I am wondering if even if it were stuck at the slower speeds, would this have any impact on the camera, video, music, etc? I am planning on using a 128G SD card also if I get this phone.
pjcforpres said:
Just used the A1 SD card speed test app. LG V30 - Samsung 128GB Evo Select formatted as a 'removable' storage device - did the standard 4GB size write / read test twice without closing apps etc (so bit of a real life test) and once did reboot (waited 5 minutes before launching), ran the accurate test (does write, then reboot again with another 5 minute wait, then does read):
Test 1
Read - 64.01 MB/s
Write - 35.38 MB/s
Test 2
Read - 65.25 MB/s
Write - 33.13 MB/s
Test 3 (accurate test)
Read - 60.56 MB/s
Write - 37.63 MB/s
Based on other benchmarks I have seen for this SD card (~95 MB.s read and ~70 MB/s write), it does appear the V30 is not able to get full speed out of it.
And just for 'fun' here is what the internal memory was capable of in this app (only ran the 4GB test once):
Read - 524.87 MB/s
Write - 199.30 MB/s
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Excellent! Thank you!
banshee28 said:
I am wondering if even if it were stuck at the slower speeds, would this have any impact on the camera, video, music, etc? I am planning on using a 128G SD card also if I get this phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That should be enough to handle 4k and pictures being directly written to the micro SD card. You will want a card that is better than those speeds but there isn't any need to go for anything super expensive that are rated for super fast performance.
Found Out Too late..
While the measurement numbers are great info - I didn't need to run a test, I noticed as soon as I tried to play some PSone and PSP games. Any game with heavy disc access while trying to play (sports games especially, due to commentary) stuttered like I was running them off of an external USB hard drive. Move the game to internal storage and (obviously, from the benchmarks, above) no trouble at all.
This is disappointing, as I picked up this phone expressly due to its specs for playing games (It was on sale, and replaced my cheapie Blu phone). Not the end of the world; I can move games to internal that are particularly problematic, but rather annoying and ironic, as the games most affected are the ones taking up the most space, requiring the extra MicroSD storage...
Vinc3Has3 said:
While the measurement numbers are great info - I didn't need to run a test, I noticed as soon as I tried to play some PSone and PSP games. Any game with heavy disc access while trying to play (sports games especially, due to commentary) stuttered like I was running them off of an external USB hard drive. Move the game to internal storage and (obviously, from the benchmarks, above) no trouble at all.
This is disappointing, as I picked up this phone expressly due to its specs for playing games (It was on sale, and replaced my cheapie Blu phone). Not the end of the world; I can move games to internal that are particularly problematic, but rather annoying and ironic, as the games most affected are the ones taking up the most space, requiring the extra MicroSD storage...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Go AOSP/non-Stock, format microSD to ext4, flash custom kernel and see how it changes things,
write speed will be improved by 100% (so twice as fast), read speed approx. around 10-20% (or more) compared to exfat.
Also custom kernel got general speed improvements so that might make a difference - haven't tried running anything particularly heavy off the microSD though.
That particular thing is probably the reason why Android/Google doesn't recommend using microSDs - it can really degradate and mess with experience/fun at times
zacharias.maladroit said:
Go AOSP/non-Stock, format microSD to ext4, flash custom kernel and see how it changes things,
write speed will be improved by 100% (so twice as fast), read speed approx. around 10-20% (or more) compared to exfat.
Also custom kernel got general speed improvements so that might make a difference - haven't tried running anything particularly heavy off the microSD though.
That particular thing is probably the reason why Android/Google doesn't recommend using microSDs - it can really degradate and mess with experience/fun at times
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for this info! I will definitely look into it - Although I just ran a few tests of my OLD phone, (A Blu Vivo 2(?) XL(?) - I forget), and it's read time from the micro Sd is atrocious, like 32 read and 24 write, and yet it plays PSone games just fine from the Micro SD - the SAME Micro SD that the LG V30 is stuttering on (and I've tried a drawer-full, now) - which leads me to believe it's some other type of bottleneck. After all, an actual PSone cd only reads form 150 to 300 KB (not MB) of data per second. Even with a single emulator emulating individual autonomous chips, there should be headroom, I would think, to keep things going.
... Aannnnd this moves me off-topic from this thread - So I'll stop right there.