• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

.

I'll take SATA any day of the week, as you see in my sig, i have both

I love my sata hard drive, so fast and so quiet

well the connections are different

and there is a so called 30% performance increase in favor of sata
 
Hmm.. tough choice. I don't think there is all that much difference between the two, check www.storagereview.com for all the nitty gritty details.
Right now SATA is in it's infancy, and the price premium you pay for it is probably not really worth it, unless you're blowing major cash on a WD raptor or something.

*edit*
notquiteanewbie... you're comparing your old 20GB IDE drive with a new 80GB SATA drive? That's not really a fair comparison. My old 20GB Quantum Fireball is much louder and slower then my new WD 80GB w/ 8mb cache.
 
Serial ATA all the way! once you config a SATA drive you will never want to use another IDE drve. Plus, sata is how swapable on power and connectors (not sure if you would have any use for it but it's still nice to know it's there)

I don't think it's any faster than IDE, but overall it's easier
 
If your buying a new harddrive I would go SATA but to be honest I don't think it's that much faster. If you already had an IDE harddrive it wouldn't be worth the money to upgrade to SATA.
 
http://www.serialata.org/

serial ata will be the new interface in the years to come.

the performance difference, is slightly better for a SATA drive, at a theorical 150mb/s. But the price is slightly higher, and I belive size is still a little smaller. (like you can get 300GB IDe drives, but to my knowledge, SATA drives are still like 160gb)

also, the cables are nice and tidy, so it will help less clutter in your case.

so yes, serial ata is the way to go for a next generation system, that will be future compatible....but IDE will still be around for the next few years as well...
 
right now, there's not much of a difference

how ever, planning for the future, sata will be better

the newer intel chipsets will have 4 sata connectors and only 1 ide connection (last i heard anyways)

eventually, cd-roms will have sata also, and ide will be phased out
 
there are some 10k rpm SATA drives. other than that, the 7200's are pretty much all the same, even though SATA has a burst speed that is faster, in all benchmarks i've seen comparing SATA to IDE drives, there the advantage is null. although recently SATA drives are matching their IDE counterparts.
 
at this point no drive is fast enough to fill the bandwidth of either SATA or IDE... the prices are maybe a little bit higher on SATA if that.

I thin that serial ATA is better because of how outdated IDE is... and it was never really meant to be puched to the speeds that we are, therefor data corruption and things like that would be the reason for me to switch over to SATA.
 
The SATA versus PATA debate is like the AMD versus Intel thing. Some people just swear by one or the other. Problem with the SATA/PATA thing is that at some point the PATA camp will HAVE to make the shift. There are many reasons SATA has come about. PATA has hit the wall speed wise. Error correction on the PATA interface started to come into play. As the bus speed got faster there are more instances of having to resend the packets of info because they didn't get to their destination. That slows the whole transfer process down. Don't believe- me buy a book. The single drive on SATA solves not only the master/slave jumper thing, but helps in the error correction situation too. I've seen the same future plan that Velocity Pimp referred to. PATA is going to go the way of the ISA slot. As soon as SATA is running at the 300Mbytes/sec, the PATA boys will come around. Think long term.;)
 
no perf dif and i have tested this myself

best if u use only one ide hdd per cable for perf (i never have more then 1 hdd per cable anyway so for me its null issue)

really if u want perf scsi is the way to go its more expincive but u can use up to 15 devices a cable(withmost cards) and they can all be accessed at the same time unlike ide where the controler must switch between the drivers
also scsi uses ALOT less resorces becouse the scsi drives and cont card handel most of the prosessing
ide is much more cpu bound :(

depending on the price ur able/willing to spend i would probbly just get the best drive for the cash thats normaly pata and since its gonna be a while b4 sata is mature (there are still some issues) i wouldnt worrie about sata vs pata just get what is the best price/capacity/specs

if u got the funds scsi is the way to go check on the latest scsi/sca enterfaces i havent used the newest ones yet (havent build a good server in a while or even a good cad workstation :( )

but in my exp even the older more common scsi raids will give u better perf then most ide rigs

infact i got a server me and a buddy setup using parts we each had laying around and a raid of sca3 drives we gott off ebay its funny its raid is faster then my ata133 200gb and is about the came capacity(195gb)
that whole systems faster for stuff thats hdd bound and the cpu's are just a couple OLD p3 xeon 450's( got from a server we upgraded for a local buisness)

my next rig is gonna be scsi agin ata is just to confining :/
 
Originally posted by PF Prophet
if u got the funds scsi is the way to go check on the latest scsi/sca enterfaces i havent used the newest ones yet (havent build a good server in a while or even a good cad workstation :( )
Click to expand...



Isn't Ultra320 SCSI the LATEST SCSI interface?




Here's what I know:

Ultra320 SCSI - (16-bit Wide) 320 MByte/sec = State-of-the-art hard drives

Ultra160 SCSI - (16-bit Wide) 160 MByte/sec = Hard drives

Ultra2 SCSI - (16-bit Wide) 80 MByte/sec = Hard drives

Ultra Wide SCSI - (16-bit Wide) 40 MByte/sec = Hard drives and tape drives

Ultra SCSI - (8-bit Narrow) 20 MByte/sec = CD-R, CD-RW, tape, removable storage (Jaz), and DVD drives

SCSI-2, Fast SCSI - (8-bit Narrow) 10 MByte/sec = Scanners, Zip drives, and CD-ROM



Is that pretty much all of them? Is there something newer I am missing?


SuperG
 
for less funds you can soft raid with the ich5r. getting more storage space and more if not equal speed. scsi's primary advantage is concurrent activity with all devices. if you are going to use only one device then it is a tremendous waste of money and possible extra storage gained from ata.

scsi is not really as great as people make it out to be. used scsi for years, so i am not knocking it down-it does have a market, specially multiprocessors systems. but most end users are not a part of that market unless they want to join a pissing contest.

with native ata resource issues are the past. cpu usage can change from controller to controller on any of the interfaces. at times they can be almost equal. it all depends on the logic of the controller.

http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/hwdev/tech/storage/Native-modeATA.mspx

edit note: i would select sata if i had the choice. if not then ide would be next.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top