SATA and ATA

  • Thread starter Thread starter daleok
  • Start date Start date
okay there may be little difference when running ATA 133 or SATA 150.
however, SATA v1 (150 mb/s) will offer a route to increase perform
dramatically in a sort space of time, where the old ATA technology was
slowing down in rate of development. SATA v2 expected around 2004 will
offer
300 Mb/s. There are even rumours of SATA v3 been well in the 600Mb/s region
getting near to the expensive Ultra640 SCSI Spec. This open up all sorts of
opportunities eg. Future versions of SATA will go well with the iSCSI
protocol building cheap alternatives to SAN configurations.

Andi
 
Andrew said:
okay there may be little difference when running ATA 133 or SATA 150.
however, SATA v1 (150 mb/s) will offer a route to increase perform
dramatically in a sort space of time, where the old ATA technology was
slowing down in rate of development. SATA v2 expected around 2004 will
offer
300 Mb/s. There are even rumours of SATA v3 been well in the 600Mb/s region
getting near to the expensive Ultra640 SCSI Spec. This open up all sorts of
opportunities eg. Future versions of SATA will go well with the iSCSI
protocol building cheap alternatives to SAN configurations.
Click to expand...


You mean "MB/s"
There's a significant difference.


-WD
 
okay there may be little difference when running ATA 133 or SATA 150.
You mean "MB/s"
There's a significant difference.
Click to expand...

Would you care to enlighten the rest of us?
 
Stephen said:
Would you care to enlighten the rest of us?
Click to expand...


Sure.
Mb is Mega Bit
MB is Mega Byte

There are 8 bits in a byte. So if you were to tell me there's some new
drive technology "x" out there that promises 600 Mb/sec, I'll be
unimpressed, since my ATA100 interface is faster than that.


-WD
 
okay there may be little difference when running ATA 133 or SATA 150.
Sure.
Mb is Mega Bit
MB is Mega Byte

There are 8 bits in a byte. So if you were to tell me there's some new
drive technology "x" out there that promises 600 Mb/sec, I'll be
unimpressed, since my ATA100 interface is faster than that.
Click to expand...


Cheers, wasn't aware of that. (Probably forget again by tomorrow too.....
:P)
 
You know how isp's advertise "1.5 mb/s cable" or "768 kb/s dsl" or "56 kb
dialup"? Well, thats BITS, not BYTES. When you download something, you see
BYTES. Thats why the fastest you saw downloading on a 56k modem was about
5-6 KB/sec, or 5 x 8 = 40 kbits per second.
 
Howdy!

Lenny said:
You know how isp's advertise "1.5 mb/s cable" or "768 kb/s dsl" or "56 kb
dialup"? Well, thats BITS, not BYTES. When you download something, you see
BYTES. Thats why the fastest you saw downloading on a 56k modem was about
5-6 KB/sec, or 5 x 8 = 40 kbits per second.
Click to expand...

Actually, 5 x 10 - don't forget that serial ports add a start bit
and a stop bit to delineate the bytes.

Rw "Member of Pedants'R Us since 1956" P
 
You mean "MB/s"
There's a significant difference.
Click to expand...


oops sorry I thought most people would get the drift, I do often mess up my
caps when typing fast :-(
if you look I also used mb/s (LOL) ... shame on me!
I will spend a little more care next time and get it written correctly..
just for you folks

many thanks

Andi
 
Back
Top