SATA any better than ATA

[Rob Stow]

=|[ Rob Stow's ]|= wrote:

............

And an interesting result on something else ...
5400 rpm 40 GB Maxtor that is in that system
as the Master on the secondary IDE port:
with *idle* DVD drive as slave: 36.1 23.0 30.1
with DVD drive disconnected: 43.0 23.7 35.8

Slowcoach ;p

The only reason that drive is still in the system is
so that the guy who said he'll buy it can see it in
operation before he hands over the money. And the
speed of that drive is kind of beside the point - it
is the difference in speeds when the DVD drive is
connected as compared to when it is disconnected that
I thought others might find interesting.

 

[Creeping Stone]

=|[ Ben Pope's ]|= wrote:
......

Its a pity HDTach wouldn't test the Ramdrive :]

Just do a RAM benchmark - read is in the order of 2.5GB/s, writes a little
under 1GB/s (using DDR333)

That would be for a perfectly efficient ramdrive, this one I use - Cenatek
NT, only scores about 10 times as fast as the Maxtor at the moment.
Its great for crucial files though - big webcache and small pagefile on it
at the moment.

 

[Courseyauto]

Not really... I think the Raptor is still the only 10K RPM drive and thus
wipes the floor with the rest.

Not really according to some h/d tests in PCW (May issue). It was
*slightly* faster than the Hitachi Deskstar 7200 ATA 100. Wouldn't
notice the difference in normal use, i.e. without benchmarks.


Cheers,

Guy

** I may not be perfect, but I'm
** English, and that's the next best thing!
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Well i installed a raptor drive i sure can see the difference,without
benchmarks............

 

[Ben Pope]

Not really according to some h/d tests in PCW (May issue). It was
*slightly* faster than the Hitachi Deskstar 7200 ATA 100. Wouldn't
notice the difference in normal use, i.e. without benchmarks.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Well i installed a raptor drive i sure can see the difference,without
benchmarks............

That's because you are doing something other than sequential reads/writes.

Your quoting style sure is confusing, I just can't get used to it!

Ben

 

[Dr Teeth]

And the
speed of that drive is kind of beside the point - it
is the difference in speeds when the DVD drive is
connected as compared to when it is disconnected that
I thought others might find interesting.

I wonder if turning 'autoplay' off would make any difference?

Cheers,

Guy

** I may not be perfect, but I'm
** English, and that's the next best thing!

 

[Courseyauto]

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Well i installed a raptor drive i sure can see the difference,without
benchmarks............

That's because you are doing something other than sequential reads/writes.

Your quoting style sure is confusing, I just can't get used to it!

A7N8X FAQ: www.ben.pope.name/a7n8x_faq.html
Questions by email will likely be ignored, please use the >newsgroups.
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...

Loading windows XP is 15 to 20 seconds faster than my Maxtor drive. DOUG

 

[Rubens]

Forget both SATA and PATA. Go SCSI !

 

[~ Q ~]

Rubens - typed:

Forget both SATA and PATA. Go SCSI !

Do SCSI drives come with free ear muffs? They certainly should - they
cost enough over & above SATA.

*If* SATA II lives up to expectations (where SATA hasn't), SCSI could be
obsolete. If SCSI can spin at a loud 15kRPM, so could ATA. SATA II has a
beefed up TCQ & asynchronous I/O which would also do for workstations
what TQC has done for servers, especially if s/w was rewritten to
actually use async I/O. The newest Raptor is supposedly /very/ quiet but
still doesn't have TQC. My guess is its implementation would slow down
desktop performance enough to worry the Raptor's existing market.
Precious little sign of SATA optical devices - still. STR is about the
least useful metric of h/d performance anyhow. Great for getting high
benchmarks though.

 

[Ben Pope]

Rubens - typed:


Do SCSI drives come with free ear muffs? They certainly should - they
cost enough over & above SATA.

*If* SATA II lives up to expectations (where SATA hasn't),

Depends on your expectations. It seems a lot of people expected it to
magically double performance - They were disappointed but SATA never
promised significantly increased performance.

SCSI could be
obsolete. If SCSI can spin at a loud 15kRPM, so could ATA. SATA II has a
beefed up TCQ & asynchronous I/O which would also do for workstations
what TQC has done for servers, especially if s/w was rewritten to
actually use async I/O. The newest Raptor is supposedly /very/ quiet but
still doesn't have TQC.

It does have command queuing. I dunno whether it's TCQ or not, but

In reference to the WD740JD:
"Western Digital's Ultra/150 CQ technology optimizes the sequence of data
transfers to the hard drive from the host"

My guess is its implementation would slow down
desktop performance enough to worry the Raptor's existing market.

Not a good guess.

Precious little sign of SATA optical devices - still. STR is about the
least useful metric of h/d performance anyhow. Great for getting high
benchmarks though.

Whats STR? Oh, sustained transfer rate. Well, it's hard to say that it's
about the least useful measure. The most useful measure is the one most
closely related to your task. If you have one huge file, or work with very
big files, throwing them from here to there and back, then "STR" is probably
the most useful measure.

In terms of normal desktop performance, no, it's not especially useful on
it's own - but it's one of the few measures I can get an easy handle on.

Ben