What are the benefits? Is is faster than ata? Does it require two drives to perform fast like RAID?
Printable View
What are the benefits? Is is faster than ata? Does it require two drives to perform fast like RAID?
The big difference is that the data bits are shipped to the local I/O bus serially (one behind the other) rather than in parallel. This simplifies timing and interference problems. They currently aren't any faster; mainly because there aren't any HDs that can even exploit ATA100, even with a cache hit (burst). It will still take two HDs or more to implement RAID.
The only SATA drives now that are faster then PATA drives are the WD raptor drives which is a SCSI drive with a SATA interface :P No wonder it is faster :D Plus the price is expensive for a 36GB drive :D
Currently SATA drive is only faster with write speeds and all the other benchmarks are slower then PATA.
The main benefit is that the cables aren't so godawful wide and are very thin at stock.
And it can be used in RAID just as easy as PATA.
Are you talking about the first beta review? I looked over the stats again. All of the tests beat IDE. A few of them beat the SCSI drives. Although it has nothing to do with SATA. It has to do with the 10,000RPM rotation speed.Quote:
Originally posted by Colossus
The only SATA drives now that are faster then PATA drives are the WD raptor drives which is a SCSI drive with a SATA interface :P No wonder it is faster :D Plus the price is expensive for a 36GB drive :D
Currently SATA drive is only faster with write speeds and all the other benchmarks are slower then PATA.
Eric
If you read my post, I talked about the Raptor being faster due to it being a SCSI HD with a SATA interface :)
All the other SATA drives that are 7200rpm that are not a SCSI drive all performed slower :)