Forum Home
Press F1
 
Thread ID: 82222 2007-08-20 02:22:00 Is a SATA HD appreciably faster than ATA? braindead (1685) Press F1
Post ID Timestamp Content User
582853 2007-08-20 02:22:00 I've just built a new PC using an Asus P5K mobo which only provides 1 ATA port for 2 ATA/IDE devices. I need to expand and use one of the SATA hd ports.

All things such as cache and RPM being equal, Is SATA data transfer faster than ATA or is it just a more modern protocol?

I won't be using RAID just yet.

Thanks and appreciation.
braindead (1685)
582854 2007-08-20 02:30:00 www.directron.com Rob99 (151)
582855 2007-08-20 02:39:00 Thank you for that Rob99 - just what I need. braindead (1685)
582856 2007-08-20 06:55:00 Wow, SATA really does kick ass. beeswax34 (63)
582857 2007-08-20 07:12:00 Are SCSI drives faster than SATA drives? winmacguy (3367)
582858 2007-08-20 07:23:00 Are SCSI drives faster than SATA drives?Mostly no, particularly SATA2. A simple Google "scsi vs sata" brings up a lot of links (www.pugetsystems.com), eg this one. Greg (193)
582859 2007-08-20 07:25:00 Thanks for that Greg.:) winmacguy (3367)
582860 2007-08-20 07:46:00 I'm pretty sure the answer is actually no. While the SATA interface is much better & capable of higher speeds the drives themselves have yet to max out the older ATA 100 or 133 standards ( average drives anyway ) for more than very short bursts.

Testing my SATA hard drives with benchmarking software gets an average transfer rate in the 40-45 MB/s range - nowhere near the bandwidth available. Setting up a RAID array with 2 of these ( 120G seagate barracuda SATA drives ) gets me up to the mid 70's, which still wouldn't max out an ATA 100 interface ( I think ).

SATA is better though, and if you are buying a new drive don't buy anything else (IMHO). But if you already have an ATA drive replacing it won't give you any performance benefits
dugimodo (138)
582861 2007-08-20 10:53:00 I might just get an external SATA now seeing that my mobo has a e-SATA port rather than an internal one. Stay with the new technology:thumbs: beeswax34 (63)
582862 2007-08-20 11:48:00 I think it is just the interface that is the difference. The actual performance between the likes of a Seagate 250GB 7200rpm 16MB ATA-6/100 and a Seagate 250GB 7200rpm 16MB SATA-2 is nothing. (It's about $5 extra for the SATA-2 drive). It's just the interface that connects them to the motherboard. If you set up say, 4 ATA-6/100 drives in a RAID 0 configuration, the maximum transfer speeds you can get is 100MB/sec, whereas if you did the same with 4 SATA-2 drives in a RAID 0 configuration, you could get close to the 300MB/sec of the SATA-2 interface.

I myself have 4 SATA-2 drives, with 2 of them in a RAID 0 array, and I notice a big difference when working with files on that drive!

I think what I've said above is correct, it's just my understanding of some quick research I have done just now. Open to any suggestions/corrections!
stephen (9719)
1