New PC Intel Or Amd

JustMe wrote:
Why are there sata hd then if they aren't usefull? how many mbps does
an 80gb with 8M cache?

There are advantages... cabling is MUCH nicer, hot-plugging when the OSs
support it properly and a few other things that can improve performance a
little.

It's a replacement for parallel interface - many fast interfaces are serial
now - by using a differential pair noise immunity is much reduced and speeds
can soar.

An 80Gb drive with an 8Meg cache can burst as fast as the interface, but not
for very long... at 100Megs/s thats 80ms, IF you want everything in the
cache, which is unlikely. Sustained transfer speeds peak at maybe 40Megs/s.
The WD Raptor, which is the fastest ATA drive around (and it's natively a
parallel ATA drive with a SATA bridge onboard) can sustain writing at
45Megs/s in my experience. I think reading is up to nearly 60Megs/s.

If you want the fastest drive out there without going SCSI, go SATA and get
the WD Raptor, otherwise get whatever, unless you're planning on it lasting
a LONG time. Eventually they will get rid of parallel ATA and new
motherboards won't come with it. I'd expect this to happen maybe 2-3 years
after they stop selling parallel ATA drives, unless there is some other
driving force behind it - such as a big move to BTX form factor.

Ben
--
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 09:32:47 +0100, "Ben Pope"
wrote:


There are advantages... cabling is MUCH nicer, hot-plugging when the OSs
support it properly and a few other things that can improve performance a
little.

don't think i'll be doing al lot of hot plugging..


It's a replacement for parallel interface - many fast interfaces are serial
now - by using a differential pair noise immunity is much reduced and speeds
can soar.

An 80Gb drive with an 8Meg cache can burst as fast as the interface, but not
for very long... at 100Megs/s thats 80ms, IF you want everything in the
cache, which is unlikely. Sustained transfer speeds peak at maybe 40Megs/s.

and an 80Gb with 2Mb cache? about the same or a lot slower?

The WD Raptor, which is the fastest ATA drive around (and it's natively a
parallel ATA drive with a SATA bridge onboard) can sustain writing at
45Megs/s in my experience. I think reading is up to nearly 60Megs/s.

If you want the fastest drive out there without going SCSI, go SATA and get
the WD Raptor, otherwise get whatever, unless you're planning on it lasting
a LONG time. Eventually they will get rid of parallel ATA and new

I once bought an SCSI drive thinking it would last a very long time..
it was an fast 2, and by the time i wanted a new system fast 2 was
gone.. since then i don't plan for a long time anymore.. Are there any
plans already for an new version off sata?

motherboards won't come with it. I'd expect this to happen maybe 2-3 years
after they stop selling parallel ATA drives, unless there is some other
driving force behind it - such as a big move to BTX form factor.

in other words just buy an ide 80gb..

Is there any advantage on the deluxe board then? Is the IEEE any good
or should i just buy an card for it?

klaas

JustMe wrote:
On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 09:32:47 +0100, "Ben Pope"
wrote:
An 80Gb drive with an 8Meg cache can burst as fast as the interface, but
not for very long... at 100Megs/s thats 80ms, IF you want everything in
the cache, which is unlikely. Sustained transfer speeds peak at maybe
40Megs/s.

and an 80Gb with 2Mb cache? about the same or a lot slower?

What people don;t seem to understand is that the interface has little
bearing on the performance of a drive. Usually the interface is much faster
than the drive and therefore does not hold it back. It is the drive
mechanism that determines the raw speed of the drive. You can then have
efficient algorithms that reduce the raw speed less than others.

A cache is useful for storing the bits of data that are expected to be asked
for next - the larger the cache, the more likely you have the data in the
cache. So on average, a drive with an 8Meg cache will perform better then
the same drive with a 2Meg cache. The peak sustained transfer rate is
unaffected by cache.

The WD Raptor, which is the fastest ATA drive around (and it's natively a
parallel ATA drive with a SATA bridge onboard) can sustain writing at
45Megs/s in my experience. I think reading is up to nearly 60Megs/s.

If you want the fastest drive out there without going SCSI, go SATA and
get the WD Raptor, otherwise get whatever, unless you're planning on it
lasting a LONG time. Eventually they will get rid of parallel ATA and
new

I once bought an SCSI drive thinking it would last a very long time..
it was an fast 2, and by the time i wanted a new system fast 2 was
gone.. since then i don't plan for a long time anymore.. Are there any
plans already for an new version off sata?

Yes. But it will be backwards compatible with the current version so any
drive you buy today will work on the new version. Much like USB and USB2.

http://www.serialata.org/about/index.shtml

motherboards won't come with it. I'd expect this to happen maybe 2-3
years after they stop selling parallel ATA drives, unless there is some
other driving force behind it - such as a big move to BTX form factor.

in other words just buy an ide 80gb..

If thats what you want, yeah. 2-3 years down the line, you may as well
throw away your old drives as their capacity is almost insignificant
compared to what is available now, and usually much slower too. And then
there's the reliability factor... since it is one of the few mechanical
components in the computer it's life is much shorter than other components.

Is there any advantage on the deluxe board then? Is the IEEE any good
or should i just buy an card for it?

I personally went for the Deluxe as it has everything on board - I wanted a
WD Raptor so the SATA was useful. I liked the idea of the better onboard
sound. I liked the idea of 2 network ports. I thought the price difference
for the extra bits was an absolute bargain. Even if I had no immediate
requirement for them, I thought it was worth going for it.

I have not used the FireWire port, but if it works, it works. I suspect
it's ok in terms of speed and cpu overhead because it's built into the
chipset.

Ben
--
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...

In article ,
says...
JustMe wrote:
Why are there sata hd then if they aren't usefull? how many mbps does
an 80gb with 8M cache?

There are advantages... cabling is MUCH nicer, hot-plugging when the OSs
support it properly and a few other things that can improve performance a
little.

It's a replacement for parallel interface - many fast interfaces are serial
now - by using a differential pair noise immunity is much reduced and speeds
can soar.

An 80Gb drive with an 8Meg cache can burst as fast as the interface, but not
for very long... at 100Megs/s thats 80ms, IF you want everything in the
cache, which is unlikely. Sustained transfer speeds peak at maybe 40Megs/s.
The WD Raptor, which is the fastest ATA drive around (and it's natively a
parallel ATA drive with a SATA bridge onboard) can sustain writing at
45Megs/s in my experience. I think reading is up to nearly 60Megs/s.

64~65 megs sustained transfer here using 2 Raptors running RAID-0.



snip

Ben



Bill

Bill wrote:
In article ,
says...
I think reading is up to nearly 60Megs/s.

64~65 megs sustained transfer here using 2 Raptors running RAID-0.

I've just read that 55Megs/s is the read speed for a single drive. So I
wasn't far out :-)

Ben
--
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 17:14:45 +0100, "Ben Pope"
wrote:

Bill wrote:
In article ,
says...
I think reading is up to nearly 60Megs/s.

64~65 megs sustained transfer here using 2 Raptors running RAID-0.

I've just read that 55Megs/s is the read speed for a single drive. So I
wasn't far out :-)

Ben

Ever needed that 55M/s?

Looks like the choice for SATA disks around here is a bit limited.
Seagate and Maxtor, WD only in 36Gb format and all 7200rpm models.
Think i'll through an IDE 80Gb 8Mb cache in the system. A deluxe mobo
is only 30 euro's more expensive. The extra Lan is useful for creating
an local network and let this pc act as an server.. Or are there any
reasons for putting in a special router and not use an AMD as an
server?

klaas

JustMe wrote:
Ever needed that 55M/s?

Not really. But I like it :-P

The hard drive is the only thing you notice that you're waiting around for
these days, the quicker the better.

Looks like the choice for SATA disks around here is a bit limited.
Seagate and Maxtor, WD only in 36Gb format and all 7200rpm models.

WD do larger SATA drives than 36Gigs, their Raptors are 36Gigs and 10000rpm.
They're bringing out some new Raptors, FDM bearings, 4.2ms seek rather then
5.2 (I think) and 36 and 72 Gig models.

Think i'll through an IDE 80Gb 8Mb cache in the system. A deluxe mobo

Sounds like a plan. The 8Meg cache models are quite nippy.

is only 30 euro's more expensive. The extra Lan is useful for creating
an local network and let this pc act as an server.. Or are there any
reasons for putting in a special router and not use an AMD as an
server?

Yeah, you can switch the computer off, and it doesn't take any resources,
and if you use Windows, you don't have to rely on the rather unreliable and
awkward ICS.

Ben
--
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:49:09 +0100, "Ben Pope"
wrote:

JustMe wrote:
Ever needed that 55M/s?

Not really. But I like it :-P

The hard drive is the only thing you notice that you're waiting around for
these days, the quicker the better.

Thats true, perhaps with this argument i can persuide my girlfriend
to spend more money but she is more into internetting, so 55 Meg/s
on an 512kb/s (and most off the times a lot less) connection seems a
bit overdone :-)



Yeah, you can switch the computer off, and it doesn't take any resources,
hmm thats true

and if you use Windows, you don't have to rely on the rather unreliable and
awkward ICS.
all windows is awkward, but Linux is a bit to "awkward" for my girl..
putting in an router would be an idea to solve that.. does Linux run
smooth on an AMD? hmm but then i don't reallly need the deluxe.. sound
is on the a7N8X and A7N8X-X the same, only IEEE remains then..

So my system should be:
Mobo: A7N8X-X or A7N8X
Proc: 2500+
Mem: 512Mb Corsair (1 stick)
Hd: 80Gb/8Mb cache
Video: ATI 9600 Pro
and some stuf as an DVD player/rewriter and so on..

Klaas

JustMe wrote:
Thats true, perhaps with this argument i can persuide my girlfriend
to spend more money but she is more into internetting, so 55 Meg/s
on an 512kb/s (and most off the times a lot less) connection seems a
bit overdone :-)

Well, it's more about general feel than downloading. I'm on dialup at the
moment :-( But my programs still load fast, files copy fast and it's
generally just nice to use. When the time comes (about 10gigs away :-) I'll
get myself a large disk, probably a WD with 8meg cache approaching 200gigs
for everything else.

all windows is awkward, but Linux is a bit to "awkward" for my girl..

Fair comment, I struggle with it a bit and I'm supposed to be able to figure
out these things :-)

putting in an router would be an idea to solve that..

It makes life easy - takes away any thought and configuration.

does Linux run smooth on an AMD?

You really want to get kernel 2.6 for the nForce2 platform, otherwise no
problems... test4/5 is stable enough.

hmm but then i don't reallly need the deluxe.. sound
is on the a7N8X and A7N8X-X the same, only IEEE remains then..

You sure the sound is the same?

So my system should be:
Mobo: A7N8X-X or A7N8X
Proc: 2500+
Mem: 512Mb Corsair (1 stick)
Hd: 80Gb/8Mb cache
Video: ATI 9600 Pro

If you do go Linux, the RV350 is only just being supported natively in
XFree86, you'll want the latest version of X really (4.4), and the ATI
closed source drivers aren't great for 3D.

Ben
--
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...

Well, it's more about general feel than downloading. I'm on dialup at the
moment :-( But my programs still load fast, files copy fast and it's
generally just nice to use. When the time comes (about 10gigs away :-) I'll
get myself a large disk, probably a WD with 8meg cache approaching 200gigs
for everything else.

thats true and Microsoft and others keep on increasing the size off
programs so how faster how better..

all windows is awkward, but Linux is a bit to "awkward" for my girl..

Fair comment, I struggle with it a bit and I'm supposed to be able to figure
out these things :-)

I'm lazy didn't try Linux yet, used to work on the big HP-UX servers
and didn't want to do the same at home.. but perhaps one off these
days i'll put it on or on my old pentium



does Linux run smooth on an AMD?

You really want to get kernel 2.6 for the nForce2 platform, otherwise no
problems... test4/5 is stable enough.

hmm but then i don't reallly need the deluxe.. sound
is on the a7N8X and A7N8X-X the same, only IEEE remains then..

You sure the sound is the same?

On the asus site all these boards have on board sound based on
realtek® ALC650 6CH w/built in HP amplifier

The deluxe only has an Integrated APU(Audio Processor Unit)
SoundStorm?/ Dolby® Digital (AC-3) Encoder and 1 x S/PDIF out + 1 x
Surround L/R audio jack + 1 x CNTR/LFE audio jack

so oke its not totally the same, but i don't think i'll be using an
surrond system on my pc.


So my system should be:
Mobo: A7N8X-X or A7N8X
Proc: 2500+
Mem: 512Mb Corsair (1 stick)
Hd: 80Gb/8Mb cache
Video: ATI 9600 Pro

If you do go Linux, the RV350 is only just being supported natively in
XFree86, you'll want the latest version of X really (4.4), and the ATI
closed source drivers aren't great for 3D.

How about the Geforce FX5600? same or beter supported?

Klaas