SATA 3Gb - When?

[Jack]

Anyone know when the next generation SATA 3Gb will be coming?
I am waiting to build my new computer when this standard becomes
available on motherboards and hard drives.

 

[Bob Willard]

Anyone know when the next generation SATA 3Gb will be coming?
I am waiting to build my new computer when this standard becomes
available on motherboards and hard drives.

And why wait? The current 1.5 Gb/s SATA is quite a bit faster than
any HD, so the bus is not a bottleneck.

 

[J. Clarke]

Anyone know when the next generation SATA 3Gb will be coming?
I am waiting to build my new computer when this standard becomes
available on motherboards and hard drives.

(a) Nforce4 apparently has it--you can order the boards now, they should
ship in a few days to a few weeks. You can also get disks with that
interface.

(b) Why bother? It's just marketing hype--no drive currently on the market
is bottlenecked by ATA-100, let alone SATA-150. The only reason it exists
is that current SCSI runs 320 and the SATA promoters were feeling insecure.

 

[Eric Gisin]

Most nforce4 chipsets have it, as well as a SiI controller.

The only use for 3Gb/s is with a port multiplier, which are available in 4/5
port chips from SiI and Marvel.

It will be interesting to see the first SATA multi-drive enclosures, they
should be cheap and very fast - 200+ MB/s.

 

[Rita Ä Berkowitz]

Anyone know when the next generation SATA 3Gb will be coming?
I am waiting to build my new computer when this standard becomes
available on motherboards and hard drives.

Depending on your needs just get a good Supermicro board with a dual channel
U320 controller and a couple of Seagate Cheetah U320 SCSI drives. Waiting
for SATA to be perfected and having some sort of resemblance to reliable is
like shitting in one hand and wishing in the other.


Rita

 

[Arno Wagner]

Jack wrote:

(a) Nforce4 apparently has it--you can order the boards now, they should
ship in a few days to a few weeks. You can also get disks with that
interface.

(b) Why bother? It's just marketing hype--no drive currently on the market
is bottlenecked by ATA-100, let alone SATA-150. The only reason it exists
is that current SCSI runs 320 and the SATA promoters were feeling insecure.

Well, yes, but SCSI puts up to 16 targets (15 disks + 1 controller)
on that 320MB/s bus. SATA has just one target.

On the other hand there are enough people that do not understand how
SCSI works at all, so I guess you are perfeclty correct.

Arno

 

[J. Clarke]

Well, yes, but SCSI puts up to 16 targets (15 disks + 1 controller)
on that 320MB/s bus. SATA has just one target.

I fail to see your point. With SCSI you can have a single host adapter and
a single drive, just like SATA. Or two or three drives at which point you
can almost saturate the bus for brief intervals if you manage to get all of
them going on their fastest tracks at the same time. And with what is
currently the most popular variant the SCSI cable can span 12 meters.

On the other hand there are enough people that do not understand how
SCSI works at all, so I guess you are perfeclty correct.

The marketing people know that people will see that one number and decide on
that basis, just like clock speed on CPUs.

 

[Arno Wagner]

Arno Wagner wrote:

I fail to see your point. With SCSI you can have a single host adapter and
a single drive, just like SATA. Or two or three drives at which point you
can almost saturate the bus for brief intervals if you manage to get all of
them going on their fastest tracks at the same time. And with what is
currently the most popular variant the SCSI cable can span 12 meters.

My point is that it is comparing apples and oranges. Bus and point-to-point
topologies cannot be compared in any general way.

The marketing people know that people will see that one number and decide on
that basis, just like clock speed on CPUs.

Yes, indeed.

Arno

 

[Folkert Rienstra]

(a) Nforce4 apparently has it--you can order the boards now, they should
ship in a few days to a few weeks. You can also get disks with that interface.

(b) Why bother?

It's just marketing hype--

Nonsense, and you were told that already begin december in:
Re: What am I doing wrong ??? Or is Adaptec 21610SA just a crappy RAID card ?

So either you are utterly clueless, intend on spreading misinformation or just trolling.

no drive currently on the market is bottlenecked by ATA-100, let alone SATA-150.

But an external SATA raid would be.

The only reason it exists
is that current SCSI runs 320 and the SATA promoters were feeling insecure.

Utterly, utterly clueless.
Like Ultra320 is starting to get old and in need of a successor soon, to
keep accommodating Raid, so does SATA150 for external applications.

 

[Folkert Rienstra]

Well, yes, but SCSI puts up to 16 targets (15 disks + 1 controller)
on that 320MB/s bus.

SATA has just one target.
Nonsense.


On the other hand there are enough people that do not understand how
SCSI works at all, so I guess you are perfeclty correct.

Clueless, as always.