Economics of SATA hard drive

Merrill P. L. Worthington wrote
Rod Speed wrote

Makes more sense to do it the other way, buy a SATA drive
and a SATA PCI card, because that will be used only in the
dinosaur that wont be that fast anyway. No point in crippling
the speed of the hard drives in a new fast system by having
them on a PCI card.

What kind of advantage do you think SATA has over IDE?

The main advantage in his situation is that a SATA drive doesnt
limit his choices with the new system, he is guaranteed that any
new system he will buy will be able to use that as the boot drive.

Does it have any other than the size of the cable?

Yep.

Do you think SATA drives are faster than PATA?

Nope.

Do you think SATAdrives use the entire bandwidth available on a SATA connection for data
transfer?

Nope.

Do you think PATA drives use the entire nbandwidth available on a PATA connection.

Nope.

Do you think there's a speed advantage of SATA drives over PATA drives?

Nope.

What is the max read/write rate of any hard drive? Does it exceed the speed of PATA?
SATA? Is it close?

Completely irrelevant to why a SATA drive makes more sense FOR HIM.

"Oscar Jones" wrote in message
...
Ed Light wrote:

Hmm I'd like to filter out belligerents. Guess I'll start with Rod.

No one gives a fly red **** what you do or do not read.

You havent managed to contribute a damned thing either.
OK -- belligerent 2. Bye. Filtering ...


--
Ed Light

Smiley :-/
MS Smiley :-\

Send spam to the FTC at

Thanks, robots.

Bring the Troops Home:
http://bringthemhomenow.org

Ed Light wrote:
Makes more sense to do it the other way, buy a SATA drive
and a SATA PCI card, because that will be used only in the
dinosaur that wont be that fast anyway. No point in crippling
the speed of the hard drives in a new fast system by having
them on a PCI card.

It would still be faster than the drives.

Depends on how many there are and how they are used.

If you're imaging from one to the other, you'd be wrong
compared with SATA drives on the motherboard.

"Oscar Jones" wrote in message
...
Ed Light wrote:
"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
Ed Light wrote:
"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
Ed Light wrote:
My PATA HD and DVD are on the same channel and the HD benches up
to its maximum of 40 Mb/S.

Device manager lists them at UDMA 133 and 33. Win XP Home.

Whether this can happen may depend on the bios.

Nope, not anymore.

How far back? KT133? Pentium 1?

Back about then.

Someone could have an old board, so I was right.

Nope. You never ever are.

Ta da. Well bye, I've got you filtered.

Usual puerile stunt. Pity it wont save your bacon, ******.

Get a tranqilizer. Perhaps you'll be ok.


--
Ed Light

Smiley :-/
MS Smiley :-\

Send spam to the FTC at

Thanks, robots.

Bring the Troops Home:
http://bringthemhomenow.org

Rod Speed wrote:

kony wrote

Rod Speed wrote


we can see this with any kinds of add-on cards that
the 3rd party cards are trailing behind the motherboard
adoption of PCI Express supportive chipsets. So far
only video cards have made a significant transition, enough
to expect a good choice of technology from most manufacturers.


Bet there wont be to support PATA drives
that are now well past their useby date.


Do you mind if I quote this at a later date?


Yep, just as long as you keep that GOOD
CHOICE OF TECHNOLOGY, claim.


I'm pretty sure there will be PATA
cards available at reasonable cost.


Separate matter entirely to your GOOD CHOICE OF TECHNOLOGY claim.

And thats a ****ed config anyway, having the boot drive
on one of those in a new system, needlessly complicated.

MUCH more viable to buy a SATA drive now and use
it as the boot drive in the new system when he gets it.


Why? There's no reason and no performance gain over PATA.





There may be a few, but there wont be a good choice with those.


Cabling alone is a major downside
with a card that supports hard drives.


That is ridiculous.


Nope.


Cabling is a non-issue.


Wrong.

Its a neutral issue. You're wrong. Again. Still.




SATA cables are a little better in an esthetic sense but we can
see there is no problem at all using PATA cables and cards.


There is with a PCI Express RAID card for
PATA drives on the card design alone, let
alone the LENGTH of standard cable allowed.

No gain. Wrong again. The bandwidth of SATA isn't used by a hard
drive. Its read/write capabilities are there to justify the high-speed
SATA interface. Its all marketing crap without real performance gains.





I have 2 systems with two PCI PATA cards in them
currently. Cables are quite manageable if one merely
chooses the right length of cable, rounded if desirable.


No thanks, I'm not stupid enough to flout the ATA standard.


You're stupid enough. But it doesn't matter since there's no advantage
of SATA over PATA.

The stupid part is that you've fallen for all the marketing BS.

But keep going. Right now, you're the funniest thing on the 'net.



You dont need to with SATA.


So we see with most add-on card functionality,


Yes, but there isnt that much in the way
of addon card functionality needed now.


... but that's exactly the case with a PATA hard drive!


Wrong.


The OP doesn't NEED addon card at all!


Yes he does, to get no constraints on what
he can choose to buy with the new system.


Rather you argue that he should get one anyway...


Yes, so he isnt crippled in his choices
at all when he buys the new system.


ROTFLMAO.

You're just too funny!!

If he's using a single drive, it doesn't make any difference.




He can buy whatever is good value at that time and doesnt have
to give a damn about PATA drive support or free card slots etc.


so apparently the argument of built-in feature sets is
never really enough for some people, there is always
the chance a feature addition will be desirable and
after all it IS why there are slots on boards.


Yes, BUT FAR FEWER THAN THERE USED TO BE.


there is no reason to expect otherwise with PATA cards,


Every reason in face, its a technology thats passing its useby date
which isnt that easy to handle on a small addon card cable wise.


I have no explaination as to why you keep mentioning cables.


Yep, you havent got a clue about those basics.


And you have no clue about any of this. LOL!!




Cables are trivial, very easy to install and use on PATA.
It is not an issue.


Wrong with the DESIGN OF A PCI Express
RAID CARD THAT SUPPORTS PATA DRIVES.


hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha...

Who's talking about RAID anyrthing??!! LOL



No technology is past it's useby date when:


A) The system supports it.


Wrong again when the support is slipping away and quite
a few new motherboards only support two PATA drives
and at least one of them will be used by the DVD burner.


B) Brand new current generation products are being sold




And they have absolutely NO performance advantage over the same drive
with a PATA interface!!

You're so funny!!




What matters is being able to use almost anything on offer.

That gives you much more choice on what to buy.


C) Next gen systems are expected to
support it, at least 1 channel/2 devices.


Fat lof of good that will be if you need more than that.


D) Addon cards ARE expected to be in the market,


We'll see with PCI Express RAID cards that support PATA drives.

It wouldnt surprise me if no one bothers.


as there are still the present PCI cards even if one didn't want
(or have a free slot for) the anticipated PCI Express versions.


Irrelevant WITH THE NEW SYSTEM.


SATA is slightly superior,


Its greatly superior WITH NEW SYSTEMS WHICH HAVE LOTS
OF SATA PORTS AND BUGGER ALL PATA PORTS, AT LEAST
ONE OF WHICH WILL BE NEEDED FOR THE DVD BURNER.

hahahaha. How perfectly imbecile!!

But maybe you're being serious!! hahahaha

So let's see now. duh... jumper duh hard dwive as master, an' y dun't
we jumper the DVD as swave.




but that slight edge


It isnt a slight edge, its a major advantage WITH NEW
SYSTEMS WHICH HAVE LOTS OF SATA PORTS AND
BUGGER ALL PATA PORTS, AT LEAST ONE OF
WHICH WILL BE NEEDED FOR THE DVD BURNER.


is easily outweighed by the details or costs of implementation.


Fantasy.


It is among the last things to consider unless
one simply must have a particular drive that
only comes in SATA format like a WD Raptor,


Wrong, as always.


but then if low latency is really that important
there is also SCSI if the buyer is considering a
PCI card to support whichever drive technology.


Nope, lousy value in personal desktop systems now.


especially since there are still quite a few new
PATA products being sold but modern motherboards
are cutting back to only one PATA channel.


I doubt too many will want to move too much from their dinosaurs
to their new system. Most just discard the system and start over
with a new one and move at most the monitors etc.


"Most" just buy a whole OEM system,


Yes, but he's clearly not one of those when he
clearly plans to move that drive to the new system.


but if you are claiming they won't move stuff to their new system


No I'm not. I was just rubbing your nose in the poor market
there will be for PCI Express RAID cards for PATA drives.


then it innvalidates your entire argument about buying the SATA hard drive...


Like hell it does when he clearly wants to move that drive to the new system.


it is completely pointless if it wouldn't be moved to the new system.


Yes, but he clearly wants to move that drive to the new system.

What I was commenting on there is how much of a market the
small number of people like him will be, and that that will have
a real effect on the prospects for a decent PCI Express RAID
card that supports PATA drives. It wouldnt surprise me if there
turns out to **** all choice of those and there may not even
be one available at the time that he buys a new system.


In other words, **** all of a market for that particular product.


If you Google,
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...ATA+benchmarks


look at the very first hit, it happens to be KT266A...
http://www.tecchannel.de/ueberblick/...70/index3.html


... and this is even BEFORE one tries to use the PCI bus for
other concurrent things like audio or whatever.


75MB/s is still sufficient for single drive use.
For more drives too when not reading sequentially.


Sufficent can depend on your definition,


Nope, on how you plan to use it.


Which is a definition,


Nope.


so your "nope" is doubly wrong.


Nope.


as it is still a reduction and this already seen without any other
contention for bus throughput. Now more than ever people are
building HTPC or other special needs that can have an impact.


HTPCs arent particularly demanding on the hard drive anyway.


Quite wrong.


Quite right.


Capture some uncompressed video
while playing back another video.


Only a fool does that with an HTPC. Anyone with a clue has
digital capture cards that dont bother with uncompressed video.

I have 4 in a rather elderly 900MHz PC and I can
capture 4 channels simultaneously and play back
anything I like without that missing a beat.


HTPCs are often optimized for small size which means
they have less space for HDDs, fewer of them.


Irrelevant, they still arent demanding of the drive when done properly.


Such systems have have only one drive


Yes, as does mine.


and uncompressed video


Only a fool bothers with uncompresssed video in an HTPC.


is too bandwidth intensive to be captured to a remote
destination on a lan so a local drive has to do it.


See above.


Granted one might prefer to use lossless compression


Or get real radical and use decent modern digital TV capture cards.
That way the compression is done back in the TV station etc.


which eases the HDD performance requirement,
but either way we have a signficant data rate


No you dont, mine handles 4 of those cards fine, on a system
which has always had a less than dazzling hard drive performance,
and can play back stuff over the lan or from the hard drive fine too.


and we haven't even considered the PCI utilization of this system yet.


Its just not a problem with decent modern digital TV capture cards.


Recall that at that time even using an sound card from the most
popular manufacturer caused a problem, when a PCI IDE card
was used. We haven't even considered any other devices yet.


Irrelevant to whether a SATA drive on a
PCI card will work fine in that dinosaur.


If it's such a dinosaur, the last thing that makes sense
is to spend extra money on another PCI card for it.


Wrong when that costs peanuts when you buy it from the right
source. It makes a lot of sense to get a SATA drive so that you
arent limited at all in the choice of the new system with that drive
used as the boot drive in the new system.

What a piece of work.

You should seek immediate medical and psychological help. There are too
many crosswired neurons in your head. You need help to function in society.

Rod Speed wrote:

Merrill P. L. Worthington wrote

Rod Speed wrote


Makes more sense to do it the other way, buy a SATA drive
and a SATA PCI card, because that will be used only in the
dinosaur that wont be that fast anyway. No point in crippling
the speed of the hard drives in a new fast system by having
them on a PCI card.


What kind of advantage do you think SATA has over IDE?


The main advantage in his situation is that a SATA drive doesnt
limit his choices with the new system, he is guaranteed that any
new system he will buy will be able to use that as the boot drive.


Does it have any other than the size of the cable?


Yep.


Do you think SATA drives are faster than PATA?


Nope.


Do you think SATAdrives use the entire bandwidth available on a SATA connection for data
transfer?


Nope.


Do you think PATA drives use the entire nbandwidth available on a PATA connection.


Nope.


Do you think there's a speed advantage of SATA drives over PATA drives?


Nope.


What is the max read/write rate of any hard drive? Does it exceed the speed of PATA?
SATA? Is it close?


Completely irrelevant to why a SATA drive makes more sense FOR HIM.



OK, so you're just too stupid. But you're the funniest girl on teh
'net. So keep on posting sonny. I'm laughing at every line.

Warra wrote:

Am in the UK. Running an old system which works quite well: Via 266
mobo with Duron 1800 processor and 768MB of SD-RAM.

Will upgrade the system when I need the extra power. Currently need to
add to my data storage. Don't want to get Parallel IDE (PATA) because
newer mobos will support only SATA.

Can get a 250GB Samsung hard drive (from Komplett) for about £60 inc
delivery which is a real bargain.

But a PCI SATA adaptor by Sunsway from the same dealer costs £19. It
supports 2 SATA devices. That is definitely not a bargain as it's one-
third of the price of the 250 GB drive! What a swizz!

What viable alternatives do I have?


Bottom line is that it doesn't make any difference if you're using a
single hard drive whether its PATA or SATA. There is no performance
advantage, no operational advantage.

For proof of this, see:

http://www20.tomshardware.com/2005/09/27/round/

I quote from the report:

"It's also still true that Serial ATA works faster than UltraATA only in
a very few cases. Though both 150 and 300 MBytes/s SATA versions may be
theoretically faster than UltraATA/133 and UltraATA/100, in practice
most hard disks top out at speeds somewhat slower than 80 MBytes/s
anyway, regardless of interface type; most run at about 70 MBytes/s. In
actual use, there's little more that these devices can deliver, because
the underlying file system (this means NTFS for most Windows
installations) takes its toll and sequential disk access to a
substantial number of sectors happens only rarely."


The number reported in that test prove that (except for Raptors) SATA
drives provide no advantage over PATA for performance. Storage sizes
are comparable. The speed of the very fastest hard drives is no match
for PATA much less for SATA. the test even points out that some PATA
drives outperform their SATA counterparts.

Those that claim otherwise are either intending to steer you in the
wrong direction to make you a butt of their joke or they just don't know
what they're talking about.

But its your nickel. You can read the test reports and study the
avainable information at Tom's and elsewhere, or not.

Fact is that most hard drives don't last more than 4 years so you can
look at the next generation then.

BTW, modern systems still support PATA and will for some time, so its
not an issue.

"Merrill P. L. Worthington" wrote:

Rod Speed wrote:

.... snip much trollish drivel ...

You should seek immediate medical and psychological help. There
are too many crosswired neurons in your head. You need help to
function in society.

Please don't even respond to Trolls. It just encourages them.

--
Chuck F ) )
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
http://cbfalconer.home.att.net USE maineline address!

Merrill P. L. Worthington wrote
Rod Speed wrote
kony wrote
Rod Speed wrote

we can see this with any kinds of add-on cards that
the 3rd party cards are trailing behind the motherboard
adoption of PCI Express supportive chipsets. So far
only video cards have made a significant transition, enough
to expect a good choice of technology from most manufacturers.

Bet there wont be to support PATA drives
that are now well past their useby date.

Do you mind if I quote this at a later date?

Yep, just as long as you keep that GOOD
CHOICE OF TECHNOLOGY, claim.

I'm pretty sure there will be PATA
cards available at reasonable cost.

Separate matter entirely to your GOOD CHOICE OF TECHNOLOGY claim.

And thats a ****ed config anyway, having the boot drive
on one of those in a new system, needlessly complicated.

MUCH more viable to buy a SATA drive now and use
it as the boot drive in the new system when he gets it.

Why?

BECAUSE IT GIVE YOU MUCH MORE CHOICE WITH THE NEW SYSTEM, STUPID.

There's no reason

Wrong, as always.

and no performance gain over PATA.

Duh. Never ever said there was.

There may be a few, but there wont be a good choice with those.

Cabling alone is a major downside
with a card that supports hard drives.

That is ridiculous.

Nope.

Cabling is a non-issue.

Wrong.

Its a neutral issue.

Wrong, as always.

SATA cables are a little better in an esthetic sense but we can
see there is no problem at all using PATA cables and cards.

There is with a PCI Express RAID card for
PATA drives on the card design alone, let
alone the LENGTH of standard cable allowed.

No gain.

Wrong, as always.

The bandwidth of SATA isn't used by a hard drive.

No one ever said it was.

Its read/write capabilities are there to justify the high-speed SATA interface.

Wrong, as always.

Its all marketing crap without real performance gains.

No one ever said there were any performance gains.

WHAT MATTERS IS THAT A NEW SYSTEM WILL HAVE
LOTS MORE SATA PORTS THAN IT WILL HAVE PATA PORTS.

I have 2 systems with two PCI PATA cards in them
currently. Cables are quite manageable if one merely
chooses the right length of cable, rounded if desirable.

No thanks, I'm not stupid enough to flout the ATA standard.

You're stupid enough. But it doesn't matter since there's no advantage of SATA over
PATA.

Wrong, as always.

The stupid part is that you've fallen for all the marketing BS.

Wrong, as always.

No 'marketing bull**** in the FACT that new systems have a
lot more SATA PORTS THAN THEY HAVE PATA PORTS.

And since you cant manage any better than this utterly mindless
****, here goes the chain on the rest of your pig ignorant ****.

Rod Speed wrote:


Wrong, as always.

No 'marketing bull**** in the FACT that new systems have a
lot more SATA PORTS THAN THEY HAVE PATA PORTS.

And since you cant manage any better than this utterly mindless
****, here goes the chain on the rest of your pig ignorant ****.


ROTFLMAO!!! hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

http://www20.tomshardware.com/2005/09/27/round/

You're so clueless!!!

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Who cares if there's only one hard drive!?!! You can have a brazillian
SATA ports!! You onely need one PATA port!!

hahahahahahahaha

Jokes on you!!