Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
4/22/2019 5:32:20 PM
Posted: 8/22/2006 10:44:19 AM EDT
I have read that even todays supercharged systems can be fed very adaquately with a IDE ATA133 HD and that even a SATA 1.5gig drive is overkill. THe drives I bought say they can supply 133meg per second and have an 8meg cache. Am I good to go for the foreseeable future or will I bottleneck with my next CPU upgrade?

S.O.
Link Posted: 8/22/2006 10:48:12 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/22/2006 10:48:37 AM EDT by Thuban]
SATA is the way the industry is going. If you are building from scratch go ahead and get SATA. But I doubt you will see much of a performance increase with it either. For the most part the drives are far slower than the interface.
Link Posted: 8/22/2006 10:54:31 AM EDT
If you're asking the question, the performance difference won't effect you
You've got to be really pushing a system for IDE vs SATA to make any difference.
Link Posted: 8/22/2006 10:55:07 AM EDT
SATA and IDE drives that are otherwise identical, one using SATA and one using IDE will perform in a similar fashion. For me, I go with SATA for everything I can because the cables are smaller and this means better airflow in my case. Also SATA is the next standard, so its nice to be compliant.

x156
Link Posted: 8/22/2006 10:55:23 AM EDT
Thanks. I already have the IDE drives, got 2 200 gig drives for $80. For $65 each, I could get a WD 250gig SATA3.0 with a 16 meg cache? Worth shelving my new drives in favor of these?

S.O.
Link Posted: 8/22/2006 10:56:46 AM EDT
Could always use both...
Link Posted: 8/22/2006 10:59:30 AM EDT

Originally Posted By x156:
SATA and IDE drives that are otherwise identical, one using SATA and one using IDE will perform in a similar fashion. For me, I go with SATA for everything I can because the cables are smaller and this means better airflow in my case. Also SATA is the next standard, so its nice to be compliant.

x156


But I can use round IDE cables so that is one in favor of keeping my current drives.

I am building a mild system now because I am waiting to see where AMD is going with the AM2 socket, not sure if it is just an interim socket till the their conroe beater comes on line or if their next gen CPU will use it.
Link Posted: 8/22/2006 11:00:58 AM EDT
If you are buying a new hard drive anyways, go SATA...don't worry about upgrading already IDE drives.

SATA cables are much nicer routing and dont clutter up the inside of the case, and newer motherboards are trending away from even providing an IDE connector in the first place.
Link Posted: 8/22/2006 11:05:22 AM EDT
RAID0 SATA.. for a system drive, IDE Dynamic RADI0 for data drive...

Especially if you're tossing around large video files..

It's not for everybody though.. a couple of people have said that it's a bad idea because you lose all your data if you lose one drive.. .. so.. let's just say it's not for everybody..
Link Posted: 8/22/2006 11:06:31 AM EDT

Originally Posted By clement:
If you are buying a new hard drive anyways, go SATA...don't worry about upgrading already IDE drives.

SATA cables are much nicer routing and dont clutter up the inside of the case, and newer motherboards are trending away from even providing an IDE connector in the first place.


I already have the IDEs, NIB. Was just wondering if I should shelve them for another project if there would be a large enoughdemand on them that would slow overall performance down.

S.O.
Link Posted: 8/22/2006 11:08:50 AM EDT
Go SCSI or go home.


Seriously, keep what you have buy SATA when you get new drives down the road.

Bob
Link Posted: 8/22/2006 11:10:47 AM EDT
Use your IDE drives if you already have them. There will not be a performance bottleneck. Especially so if you are not planning on employing a RAID configuration.

As for the RAID 0 suggestion, the only way you should ever run RAID0 is if you backup your stuff to tape and don't mind doing restores.

x156

Been down the RAID0 path, now I'm RAID1.
Link Posted: 8/22/2006 11:12:26 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Ky_Bob:
Go SCSI or go home.


Seriously, keep what you have buy SATA when you get new drives down the road.

Bob


Ah, a fellow enthusiast. Yeah SCSI is great. Except for the red hot drives and the constant noise. Oh, let's not forget the expense.

If I only had the money for a nice RAID5 external setup with SCSI disks...

x156
Link Posted: 8/22/2006 3:09:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By x156:

Originally Posted By Ky_Bob:
Go SCSI or go home.


Seriously, keep what you have buy SATA when you get new drives down the road.

Bob


Ah, a fellow enthusiast. Yeah SCSI is great. Except for the red hot drives and the constant noise. Oh, let's not forget the expense.

If I only had the money for a nice RAID5 external setup with SCSI disks...

x156


You forgot the MTBF that is 10x ATA and SATA.

Bob
Link Posted: 8/22/2006 3:25:17 PM EDT
I'm running Sata and a Sata raid. (3 hard drives)


Stuff I need to store, I put on the Sata. Stuff like games and apps go on the raid.

The performance upgrade to the RAID drive is excellent. Everquest, WOW, planetside, DAOC and a bunch of single player games all run great. I "zone" twice as fast.

Link Posted: 8/22/2006 3:27:59 PM EDT
con: most motherboards I've seen only have 2 sata ports, so only 2 drives can be installed

pro: cable is smaller/thinner

most normal day to day use won't show a difference performance wise
Link Posted: 8/22/2006 3:32:04 PM EDT
SATA. Hard Drives are cheaper now than they've ever been.
Link Posted: 8/22/2006 3:32:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By sharky30:
con: most motherboards I've seen only have 2 sata ports, so only 2 drives can be installed

pro: cable is smaller/thinner

most normal day to day use won't show a difference performance wise


My new Nforce4 from MSI has 1 IDE and **6** SATAs

Link Posted: 8/22/2006 3:36:04 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Tannim:

Originally Posted By sharky30:
con: most motherboards I've seen only have 2 sata ports, so only 2 drives can be installed

pro: cable is smaller/thinner

most normal day to day use won't show a difference performance wise


My new Nforce4 from MSI has 1 IDE and **6** SATAs



Also, SATA controller cards are pretty cheap, $30-$50 I think for a decent one. That can add more SATA ports if you've got an extra pci slot.
Link Posted: 8/22/2006 4:18:31 PM EDT
The spindle speed of IDE drives isn't enough to overrun ATA, so SATA doesn't bump performance. Remember, if you want to use older operating systems, they may not recognize SATA without extra work and pain.

If you're really interested in performance, buy 15000rpm SCSI Ultra-Fast-Wide 320 drives, like the Seagate Cheetah drives matched with the appropriate Adaptec SCSI card (raid if you'd like to stripe them for even more performance). Just make sure to strap a cooling fan to them and they'll have a 5 year warranty.

nowerehaulinass!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.seagate.com/cda/products/discsales/enterprise/family/1,1086,785,00.html
Top Top