Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations gkittelson on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
sATA Questions
- Thread starter n25
- Start date
There is actually very little differance in performance between the same make/model and with ATA/SATA
This is because at present the older 100/133 bus is still plenty wide enough to not restrict even the fastest of drives at maximum bust rate, the older bus is not restricting (bottlenecking) data flow.
Obviously though, as drives get faster and research and developement money is aimed squarely at the newer SATA150 interface, the SATA drives will gradually pull away.
All mainstream motherboards to date, that support SATA also have the normal IDE connections as well and drives can also be mixed in the same machine.
If you have a choice, then go SATA, the differance in price is minimal nowadays and the very slight performance edge and cleaner wiring are worth the few dollars extra spent.
But if you havn't got SATA connections, then don't beat yourself up over it! you aren't loosing out on much.
Martin
We like members to GIVE and not just TAKE.
Participate and help others.
This is because at present the older 100/133 bus is still plenty wide enough to not restrict even the fastest of drives at maximum bust rate, the older bus is not restricting (bottlenecking) data flow.
Obviously though, as drives get faster and research and developement money is aimed squarely at the newer SATA150 interface, the SATA drives will gradually pull away.
All mainstream motherboards to date, that support SATA also have the normal IDE connections as well and drives can also be mixed in the same machine.
If you have a choice, then go SATA, the differance in price is minimal nowadays and the very slight performance edge and cleaner wiring are worth the few dollars extra spent.
But if you havn't got SATA connections, then don't beat yourself up over it! you aren't loosing out on much.
Martin
We like members to GIVE and not just TAKE.
Participate and help others.
There was a recent discussion here:
thread751-931726
Take the opinions lightly with a grain of salt!![[wink]](/data/assets/smilies/wink.gif "[wink] [wink]")
~cdogg
[tab]"All paid jobs absorb and degrade the mind";
[tab][tab]- Aristotle
[tab][navy]For general rules and guidelines to get better answers, click here:[/navy] faq219-2884
thread751-931726
Take the opinions lightly with a grain of salt!
~cdogg
[tab]"All paid jobs absorb and degrade the mind";
[tab][tab]- Aristotle
[tab][navy]For general rules and guidelines to get better answers, click here:[/navy] faq219-2884
- Thread starter
- #4
Just to add another 2¢ ...
There's nothing wrong with going SATA. It's newer, will be around longer, and the fastest drives are starting to port over to the interface more than ever before. There are still some good, solid decently fast IDE models. But if you want to invest in a top-of-the-line drive (non-SCSI), then SATA is the way to go.
Just don't pay extra for a drive that's available in both SATA and IDE formats. Go to and see if the drive has been benchmarked. Many times, a model that is available in both is roughly the same speed in both.
~cdogg
[tab]"All paid jobs absorb and degrade the mind";
[tab][tab]- Aristotle
[tab][navy]For general rules and guidelines to get better answers, click here:[/navy] faq219-2884
There's nothing wrong with going SATA. It's newer, will be around longer, and the fastest drives are starting to port over to the interface more than ever before. There are still some good, solid decently fast IDE models. But if you want to invest in a top-of-the-line drive (non-SCSI), then SATA is the way to go.
Just don't pay extra for a drive that's available in both SATA and IDE formats. Go to and see if the drive has been benchmarked. Many times, a model that is available in both is roughly the same speed in both.
~cdogg
[tab]"All paid jobs absorb and degrade the mind";
[tab][tab]- Aristotle
[tab][navy]For general rules and guidelines to get better answers, click here:[/navy] faq219-2884
- Thread starter
- #6
So this means it's just ok to have a SATA capable motherboard as they can still accept IDE drives? From what I've read so far, SATA and IDE drives have almost the same speeds (for now) and I figured I could save some money by buying an IDE drive instead to go with the SATA motherboard.
[blue]So this means it's just ok to have a SATA capable motherboard as they can still accept IDE drives?[/blue]"
Last time I checked, that was the case. I'm not aware of any SATA-only motherboards, unless perhaps you were building a compact PC using the mini-ATX form factor.
"[blue]From what I've read so far, SATA and IDE drives have almost the same speeds (for now)...[/blue]"
Many SATA drives are not much faster than their IDE counterparts, you're right. However, newer 2nd-generation SATA drives that are just starting to appear on the market can't be overlooked. The Western Digital Raptor and the Maxtor MaXLine III ( are two decent examples of SATA drives that go beyond the capabilities of any other IDE drive.
So it just depends which drive you are talking about.
"[blue]..and I figured I could save some money by buying an IDE drive instead to go with the SATA motherboard[/blue]"
Umm, not necessarily. Most newer motherboards all have both IDE and SATA connections. So there's not much room to save there. Now there are some IDE drives like the decent 7200RPM WD Caviar that have been out for several years, which are pretty cost effective. But for the most part, average SATA drives are not much more than average IDE drives. Only when you get into the high-end market for SATA do you start to see a steep difference in price.
~cdogg
[tab]"All paid jobs absorb and degrade the mind";
[tab][tab]- Aristotle
[tab][navy]For general rules and guidelines to get better answers, click here:[/navy] faq219-2884
Last time I checked, that was the case. I'm not aware of any SATA-only motherboards, unless perhaps you were building a compact PC using the mini-ATX form factor.
"[blue]From what I've read so far, SATA and IDE drives have almost the same speeds (for now)...[/blue]"
Many SATA drives are not much faster than their IDE counterparts, you're right. However, newer 2nd-generation SATA drives that are just starting to appear on the market can't be overlooked. The Western Digital Raptor and the Maxtor MaXLine III ( are two decent examples of SATA drives that go beyond the capabilities of any other IDE drive.
So it just depends which drive you are talking about.
"[blue]..and I figured I could save some money by buying an IDE drive instead to go with the SATA motherboard[/blue]"
Umm, not necessarily. Most newer motherboards all have both IDE and SATA connections. So there's not much room to save there. Now there are some IDE drives like the decent 7200RPM WD Caviar that have been out for several years, which are pretty cost effective. But for the most part, average SATA drives are not much more than average IDE drives. Only when you get into the high-end market for SATA do you start to see a steep difference in price.
~cdogg
[tab]"All paid jobs absorb and degrade the mind";
[tab][tab]- Aristotle
[tab][navy]For general rules and guidelines to get better answers, click here:[/navy] faq219-2884
- Thread starter
- #8
DiamondMAX Plus 9 drives are considered average to just over average. According to the SATA version of this drive will not give you any significant advantage over their IDE versions.
It's important to note that the DiamondMAX line has been discontinued and replaced by the MaXLine. The technology of the drive you are looking at has been out since at least February of '03 (not that it really matters how long).
In terms of overall performance, it is comparable to a WD Caviar JB version IDE drive which actually performs better and has been out longer. On the plus side, the DiamondMAX is one of the quietest drives in its class, and has a higher reliablility rating.
If you're looking for above average performance, the DiamondMAX and WD Caviar JB are two excellent choices that will get you as close as possible without putting a hole in your wallet.
~cdogg
[tab]"All paid jobs absorb and degrade the mind";
[tab][tab]- Aristotle
[tab][navy]For general rules and guidelines to get better answers, click here:[/navy] faq219-2884
It's important to note that the DiamondMAX line has been discontinued and replaced by the MaXLine. The technology of the drive you are looking at has been out since at least February of '03 (not that it really matters how long).
In terms of overall performance, it is comparable to a WD Caviar JB version IDE drive which actually performs better and has been out longer. On the plus side, the DiamondMAX is one of the quietest drives in its class, and has a higher reliablility rating.
If you're looking for above average performance, the DiamondMAX and WD Caviar JB are two excellent choices that will get you as close as possible without putting a hole in your wallet.
~cdogg
[tab]"All paid jobs absorb and degrade the mind";
[tab][tab]- Aristotle
[tab][navy]For general rules and guidelines to get better answers, click here:[/navy] faq219-2884
- Thread starter
- #10
I would think the controller would have a lot to do with performance also. An IDE to SATA conversion may/may not perform as well as a SATA controller on-board. Nor will either performa s well asa a dedicated RAID 5 controller with 512 mB cache, supporting up to 12 SATA drives. SATA is now available in amny servers aimed at small to medium sized business or departments. I'm looking at a SAN solution that will included 24 SATA drives, for a total of 6 terabytes of storage. Performance is supposed to be more than acceptable. Can't do that with IDE and there are no SCSI drives available at the same size (and prices would be a lot higher).
I also have 2 HD in my home computer. On is a 60 Gig IDE drive (Segate, I believe). The other is a 160 Gig SATA from Samsung. With it's 8meg cache, it's noticeable faster.
I also have 2 HD in my home computer. On is a 60 Gig IDE drive (Segate, I believe). The other is a 160 Gig SATA from Samsung. With it's 8meg cache, it's noticeable faster.
As a follow up to my last post, I was checking newegg.com for SATA II drives. I see both Seagate and Maxtor have them available. Maxtor, for the most part, hass added even more buffer to their drives (16mb). I can see the advantage when moving large amounts of data or many small files on a regular basis. But what about accessing a single small file, say a word processing document? Does this large buffer then begin to affect performance (I'd think that the on board drive buffer would have to stay full or nearly so to be beneficial).
Also, Seagate is showing a sustained transfer rate on it's Barracuda SATA II drive at 32 to 58 MB/sec. Wonder how that compares to IDE????
Also, Seagate is showing a sustained transfer rate on it's Barracuda SATA II drive at 32 to 58 MB/sec. Wonder how that compares to IDE????
[blue]Does this large buffer [16MB] then begin to affect performance[/blue]"
That's a good question. From the benchmarks I've seen, it doesn't appear to have on small files. The way I understand it is that the buffer can only help performance, and shouldn't hurt it. The technology should be smart enough to skip using the buffer if it doesn't contain what the drive is looking for.
As for sustained transfer rates of 33 to 58 MB/sec, I would say that is pretty solid. Many top-of-the-line IDE drives can sustain rates are usually in the range of 28 to 52 MB/sec. The WD Caviar WD2000JB 200GB ATA/100 drive ranges from 32.8 to 56.5 MB/sec in SR's benchmarks. Other SATA drives like the Maxline went from 37.2 to 65.7 MB/sec.
~cdogg
[tab]"All paid jobs absorb and degrade the mind";
[tab][tab]- Aristotle
[tab][navy]For general rules and guidelines to get better answers, click here:[/navy] faq219-2884
That's a good question. From the benchmarks I've seen, it doesn't appear to have on small files. The way I understand it is that the buffer can only help performance, and shouldn't hurt it. The technology should be smart enough to skip using the buffer if it doesn't contain what the drive is looking for.
As for sustained transfer rates of 33 to 58 MB/sec, I would say that is pretty solid. Many top-of-the-line IDE drives can sustain rates are usually in the range of 28 to 52 MB/sec. The WD Caviar WD2000JB 200GB ATA/100 drive ranges from 32.8 to 56.5 MB/sec in SR's benchmarks. Other SATA drives like the Maxline went from 37.2 to 65.7 MB/sec.
~cdogg
[tab]"All paid jobs absorb and degrade the mind";
[tab][tab]- Aristotle
[tab][navy]For general rules and guidelines to get better answers, click here:[/navy] faq219-2884
There is no speed differrence in SATA Hard drives and IDE Hard drives. If you have 2 drives and both have a rotational speed of say 7200 rpm, then they will both read and write at the same speed. Since both drives can not read or write faster than their transfer speed, it doesnt matter how fast they can trasmit the data. Theoretical speed from some silly arificial benchmark doesnt mean much.
I think the main advantage is that some day you might not be able to get motherboards with IDE ports. For instance some Intel Motherboards only have 1 IDE Port.
If you do not like my post feel free to point out your opinion or my errors.
I think the main advantage is that some day you might not be able to get motherboards with IDE ports. For instance some Intel Motherboards only have 1 IDE Port.
If you do not like my post feel free to point out your opinion or my errors.
ceh4702,
Unfortunately, that is the old SATA argument when first-generation drives came out. Yes at the time, IDE and SATA were practically identical.
Fast-forward to today...
Newer 2nd-generation SATA drives are taking advantage by including native SATA controllers within the drive itself. This allows the drive to take advantage of SATA's native specifications including one in particular - "command queuing". Read about this awesome feature:
Both links above are to different pages within the same article. But I just want to point out that new features like this one are constantly showing up in newer SATA drives. All you have to do is read an unbiased site like to see the benchmarks. Some 7200RPM SATA drives are transferring data at much faster rates than the fastest ATA/100/133 drives by as much as 15% or more.
~cdogg
[tab]"All paid jobs absorb and degrade the mind";
[tab][tab]- Aristotle
[tab][navy]For general rules and guidelines to get better answers, click here:[/navy] faq219-2884
Unfortunately, that is the old SATA argument when first-generation drives came out. Yes at the time, IDE and SATA were practically identical.
Fast-forward to today...
Newer 2nd-generation SATA drives are taking advantage by including native SATA controllers within the drive itself. This allows the drive to take advantage of SATA's native specifications including one in particular - "command queuing". Read about this awesome feature:
Both links above are to different pages within the same article. But I just want to point out that new features like this one are constantly showing up in newer SATA drives. All you have to do is read an unbiased site like to see the benchmarks. Some 7200RPM SATA drives are transferring data at much faster rates than the fastest ATA/100/133 drives by as much as 15% or more.
~cdogg
[tab]"All paid jobs absorb and degrade the mind";
[tab][tab]- Aristotle
[tab][navy]For general rules and guidelines to get better answers, click here:[/navy] faq219-2884
- Status
Similar threads
