• 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.

SATA RAID-0 vs PATA RAID-0

T

TheSpoon

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 6, 2004
Messages
431
I've been reading that the nForce3 boards allow you to hook up a PATA & a SATA HD in a single RAID-0 array, and this got me interested. Of course, the array will be running at the reduced speed of PATA, but how much does this matter? How much slower is a PATA RAID-0 array than a SATA RAID-0 array?

Thanks.
 
If you only have one PATA drive on the PATA cable, there should be no speed limitation whatsoever (if there is, it's really negligible), since no single PATA drive can fill a PATA cable. One you add more drives to the PATA cable is where you start getting degraded speeds. You can have as many SATA drives as you want, since they all have their own cable, and the 1.5Gbps link that brings them all together will never be oversaturated.

Note: A PATA drive and SATA drive with the exact same specs will run at the exact same speed. So, a PATA version of a WD Raptor would still run at its expected speeds. Try benchmarking a PATA drive for read\write, and an identical PATA drive with an ABIT Serillel connector on it for read\write. You will get pretty identical speeds. The same is true if you were to make a SATA drive back into a PATA drive.
 
Yeah, looking at the benchmarks online, it seems PATA is (at the moment) no slower than SATA. Though, I haven't seen a direct comparison of PATA RAID-0 and SATA RAID-0 (I guess I can assume the performance delta is about equal to the one between PATA & SATA), nor any review that specifically evaluates the performance of an nForce3 setup in which a PATA HD and a SATA HD have been linked in RAID-0.
 
TheSpoon said:
Yeah, looking at the benchmarks online, it seems PATA is (at the moment) no slower than SATA. Though, I haven't seen a direct comparison of PATA RAID-0 and SATA RAID-0 (I guess I can assume the performance delta is about equal to the one between PATA & SATA), nor any review that specifically evaluates the performance of an nForce3 setup in which a PATA HD and a SATA HD have been linked in RAID-0.
Click to expand...

Well isn't it true that right now about 99% of the hard drives you buy that are SATA use a PATA -> SATA bridge. That essentially guarantees equal speed when comparing a single hard drive on an PATA vs a single hard drive on a SATA, right? I think the difference will be more noticable down the road when hard drives are no longer brideged, and instead natively SATA. Also, isn't there something called command queing which will be available on the pure SATA (w/o bridge), which will considerably speed things up? Once those become widely available, I think the answer to the question SATA RAID-0 vs PATA RAID-0 for speed, will be an easy one, SATA all the way.

SuperG
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top