serial ATA performance

[Crazedscot]

Is serial ATA showing any advantages in performance over regular IDE
ATA drives yet? I'm considering upgrading my current HDD to SATA and i
was wondering if i could expect an increase in general performance,
load times and so on. Last I checked the only advantage SATA had was
the nifty little cables.

 

[Matt McKnight]

SATA operates at 150MB/s which is double PATA(IDE) It also uses less power
than PATA. The only disadvantage (so far) is that you can't have
slave/master drives. Each hard drive connects directly to the Mobo...

Hope that helps!

 

[JT]

Is serial ATA showing any advantages in performance over regular IDE
ATA drives yet? I'm considering upgrading my current HDD to SATA and i
was wondering if i could expect an increase in general performance,
load times and so on. Last I checked the only advantage SATA had was
the nifty little cables.

There are faster drives available for SATA than parallel, but just because
a drive is SATA doesn't mean it will be faster. If you check the specs and
go for the fastest drives available, then you can get better performance
than EIDE. Expect the fastest drives in the future to released on SATA.
That is the direction the manufacturers want to move.

JT

 

[The Black Wibble]

Is serial ATA showing any advantages in performance over regular IDE
ATA drives yet? I'm considering upgrading my current HDD to SATA and i
was wondering if i could expect an increase in general performance,
load times and so on. Last I checked the only advantage SATA had was
the nifty little cables.

Those nifty little cables ~and~ the fact that no longer do people have to mess around with master/slave/CS
settings. The SATA150 specification may allow for a bit more theoretical throughput than ATA133 but what HDD
can utilise the full bandwidth of either? When SATA300 controllers & HDDs become available, they will wipe
the floor with PATA hardware.

Tony.

--
3GHz P4 (HT enabled)
Asus P4C800-E Deluxe
PDC20378 IDE/SATA controller
ADI AD1985 audio
MSI FX5900U-VTD256 (BIOS 4.35.20.22.0)
2x 512MB Kingston PC3500
2x 36.7 SATA WD Raptors
52/32/52 LiteOn CD-Writer
16x Pioneer DVD-120S
Enermax 550W PSU
Windows XP Pro & Linux Fedora
PC-70 Lian Li case w/ side window
Hitachi 174SXW B 17" LCD

To email me, replace org.nz with net.nz

 

[Trent©]

There are faster drives available for SATA than parallel, but just because
a drive is SATA doesn't mean it will be faster. If you check the specs and
go for the fastest drives available, then you can get better performance
than EIDE. Expect the fastest drives in the future to released on SATA.
That is the direction the manufacturers want to move.

You are so correct on this.

Some of the newer mainboards don't even include an EIDE interface.


Have a nice week...

Trent

If the cheese isn't yours...its Nacho cheese, man!

 

[DevilsPGD]

In message <<[email protected]>> Trent©

Some of the newer mainboards don't even include an EIDE interface.

Are there any SATA optical (CD/DVD) drives out there yet?

 

[DevilsPGD]

In message <<[email protected]>> "The Black Wibble"

The SATA150 specification may allow for a bit more theoretical throughput than ATA133 but what HDD
can utilise the full bandwidth of either?

Western Digital Raptor.

 

[kony]

SATA operates at 150MB/s which is double PATA(IDE)

Double?
Must be the new math, 133 x 2 = 150

 

[kony]

Is serial ATA showing any advantages in performance over regular IDE
ATA drives yet? I'm considering upgrading my current HDD to SATA and i
was wondering if i could expect an increase in general performance,
load times and so on. Last I checked the only advantage SATA had was
the nifty little cables.

IF, and only if, your motherboard has southbridge-integrated SATA
controller, will you potentially see any improvement, and only a
slight bit at that, moreso with SATA RAID 0. Using a motherboard with
a separate SATA chip or a PCI SATA card, it's effectively bottlenecked
to same speed as PATA because of the PCI bus the SATA chip is on, but
it's much worse on a semi-modern system, because those have
southbridge integrated PATA which doesn't contend with other PCI
devices for bandwidth.

So, in some situations, a new SATA drive will significantly hurt
performance of the system. In situations where the HDD has a large,
8MB cache, AND SATA integrated into the southbridge, it can help
enough to be worthwhile.

 

[Trent©]

SATA operates at 150MB/s which is double PATA(IDE) It also uses less power
than PATA. The only disadvantage (so far) is that you can't have
slave/master drives. Each hard drive connects directly to the Mobo...

That's now been overcome.

You can run 2 SATA drives off one controller on some of the newer
boards. And the new mainboards seem to be coming with 2
controllers...just like the EIDE.


Have a nice week...

Trent

If the cheese isn't yours...its Nacho cheese, man!

 

[Trent©]

IF, and only if, your motherboard has southbridge-integrated SATA
controller, will you potentially see any improvement, and only a
slight bit at that, moreso with SATA RAID 0. Using a motherboard with
a separate SATA chip or a PCI SATA card, it's effectively bottlenecked
to same speed as PATA because of the PCI bus the SATA chip is on, but
it's much worse on a semi-modern system, because those have
southbridge integrated PATA which doesn't contend with other PCI
devices for bandwidth.

So, in some situations, a new SATA drive will significantly hurt
performance of the system. In situations where the HDD has a large,
8MB cache, AND SATA integrated into the southbridge, it can help
enough to be worthwhile.

The PCI buss can now run at 266, Kony.

Take a look at this board...

http://www.qdigrp.com/qdisite/eng/news/20030414.htm


Have a nice week...

Trent

If the cheese isn't yours...its Nacho cheese, man!

 

[kony]

The PCI buss can now run at 266, Kony.

Take a look at this board...

http://www.qdigrp.com/qdisite/eng/news/20030414.htm


Have a nice week...

Trent

If the cheese isn't yours...its Nacho cheese, man!

Unless I read that incorrectly, it's only referring to a single,
specialized port for Gb ethernet. Otherwise all PCI devices still
have 133 theoretical max, much less realized.

 

[Trent©]

Unless I read that incorrectly, it's only referring to a single,
specialized port for Gb ethernet. Otherwise all PCI devices still
have 133 theoretical max, much less realized.

I think yer right.


Have a nice week...

Trent

If the cheese isn't yours...its Nacho cheese, man!