1st time Sata drive user

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jbob
  • Start date Start date
J

Jbob

Building a new system for my son to game with. I got a Asus A7N8X deluxe
and got a 200 GB WD drive thinking it was faster than normal EIDE drives.
Now I'm not so sure. I don't plan on using Raid. Is there any advantage to
using a Sata drive if I don't plan on using Raid? If not I assume I can
just use it as a standard EIDE(UDMA of course) device right?
 
There is no speed advantage but it does free up EIDE ports and using the
short cables makes for a neater box.

J
 
sata 150 is supposedly faster than ata133, however, in reality runs at
similar speeds.
with an adapter you can connect standard pata devices to sata and with a
multiplexer
you can add two pata devices on one sata channel. However, you have to
choose these adapters
carefully if using atapi devices.

regards

Andi
 
| sata 150 is supposedly faster than ata133, however, in reality runs at
| similar speeds.
| with an adapter you can connect standard pata devices to sata and with a
| multiplexer
| you can add two pata devices on one sata channel. However, you have to
| choose these adapters
| carefully if using atapi devices.

It sounds more and more as if SATA is no big deal in the real world.

Larc



§§§ - Please raise temperature of mail to reply by e-mail - §§§
 
oh yes and I use a A7N8X-D with a 120Gb sata drive, with out using RAID
functions. I have a EIDE cdrom/dvd and
a onstream tapedrive which I run off the ata controller also on the
motherboard and I have a external cdrw that have has multiple interfaces
USB 2, USB1/1.1, SCSI, FIREWIRE,Parallel, PCMCIA that I can move between
many computers, but use USB2 on this one.

regards

Andi
 
atm, i beleive SATA is a bit of a con. apart from the cable size really.

however, there are another 2 planned stages in SATA arena. unsure on speeds,
but alot higher than the SATA150 atm.

btw, i own 2x WD raptor SATA drives in RAID0 and i like very much. only
worth 'upgrading' to SATA if you need a new HDD however.

tim
 
yes I agree sata version one is the opening to a new standard that will
befit people in the not so distant future.
I believe sata version 2 will be around 300MB/s and version 3 around
600MB/s. Ofcourse SCSI will be revamped and will be quicker for example
Ultra640 SCSI around 700MB/s but will be too costly for most home users.

Andi
 
|sata 150 is supposedly faster than ata133, however, in reality runs at
|similar speeds.

From spec cheet for Segate ST380023:

External Transfer Rate (MB/sec) up to 150
Sustained Transfer Rate (MB/sec) 27 to 44

So the interface is capable of much higher rates than the drive can
produce at a sustained rate.

Phil
 
~misfit~ said:
Larc wrote:

*Yet*.

It is new tech and will vastly improve in the next few iterations.
--
Click to expand...

The drives themselves are WAY behind the interface. They haven't saturated
ATA66 yet. Why they even bothered cooking up ATA133 was based in market
hype. Sata is an answer to a question that hadn't been asked yet.
 
its 50% faster
Click to expand...

And where do you come up with this figure? Different drives have different
density platters and that makes a huge difference. Also, the size of the
cache makes a difference. Single drives aren't able to push through 100 MB
s outside of flushing the cache, let alone 150 MB/s. No single drive on the
market, to my knowledge, has a sustained throughput that even approaches
100 MB/s. The difference between running a drive as ATA100 and ATA133 was
there, but it was minimal. I assume the difference between running ATA133
and SATA with the same drives is minimal too.

--
Big Daddy Ruel Smith

My SuSE Linux machine uptime:
8:33am up 27 days 17:18, 4 users, load average: 0.25, 0.64, 0.58

My Windows XP machine uptime:
Something less...
 
Back
Top