Are there any performance difference between standard ATA133 and Serial ATA drives?

[Lyfer]

Or is just that Serial ATA drives are alot more simpler (ie no jumper required)?

 

[gibbsman]

Serial ATA drives are typically faster (10,000 RPM's vs 7200 RPM's) and cost a lot more
The seek times are typically lower also, which is good, but that really depends on the drive.

You will get some performance boost out of it, but is it really worth the money? If you need performance then yes....For me, not until the prices comes down.

 

[lameaway]

No. Yes, theres a performance difference between the 10krpm raptors and 7200 rpm drives, but the interface has nothing to do with it. The advantage to SATA for is just the simplicity of the system and the smaller size of the cables. If you have SATA on your motherboard and you're going for a lower-end drive, I say go for it... but its not something i'd pay a significant premium for right now, especially on the higher-end drives.

 

[Fallengod]

like said already, the price difference is sooooo not worth it. What, $130 for a sata 36gb hd...when you can get a 200gb ata133 8mb cache drive for $80... Common sense..

 

[TheBDB]

Originally posted by: modempower
like said already, the price difference is sooooo not worth it. What, $130 for a sata 36gb hd...when you can get a 200gb ata133 8mb cache drive for $80... Common sense..

Well I only have about 10 GB worth of data, so I have no need for a 200 GB disk. There IS a considerable performance difference if you read the Anandtech article on the 36 GB Raptor SATA drive. For someone like me it is the better choice.

 

[IcePhoenix]

Originally posted by: modempower
like said already, the price difference is sooooo not worth it. What, $130 for a sata 36gb hd...when you can get a 200gb ata133 8mb cache drive for $80... Common sense..

Whoa, where can I get one for $80?

 

[Fallengod]

Well I only have about 10 GB worth of data, so I have no need for a 200 GB disk. There IS a considerable performance difference if you read the Anandtech article on the 36 GB Raptor SATA drive. For someone like me it is the better choice.

Well ok, but can you honesty say it is worth the price difference? Sata being 4X the price of IDE drives? I dont think so. I know of alot of people who bought sata also. I just dont see it. There is a point where space is better than top speed, and 36gb is below that point. What you said just does not make sense, if you only HAVE 10gb of data, why would you need the top speed hard drive if you are not copying big files around. And if you were copying big files around, you would need big space to do so! Just my opinion.

 

[DaveSimmons]

Originally posted by: IcePhoenix

Originally posted by: modempower
like said already, the price difference is sooooo not worth it. What, $130 for a sata 36gb hd...when you can get a 200gb ata133 8mb cache drive for $80... Common sense..

Whoa, where can I get one for $80?

Some Hot Deals PM and coupon fraud. They're still $160 for honest buyers.

 

[Fallengod]

Pffffft.....Its called rebate+pricematch+ coupon, I dont see the fraud. Go check out the hot deals forum....If it were fraud, the stores wouldnt allow it, and either would anandtech forums....

 

[Confused]

Most SATA drives (the WD Raptor being the exception) are standard Parallel ATA drives, with SATA interface. All these drives are identical in speed (7200rpm) and storage capacity (like 200gb) compared to their PATA brothers.

The WD Raptor, however, is totally different. It is a 10,000rpm, almost SCSI drive. The higher rotation speeds help with Sustained Transfer Rates, and it's SCSI background helps it have insanely low seek times. Both of these together make it a very nippy drive. As it is basically a SCSI drive, these are designed for speed and reliability, not huge storage capacities. If you want more space with SCSI, you add more drives!


For you guys to be making judgements on how crap/expensive SATA is to PATA (they're both IDE devices, with a different connection) make sure you're comparing apples to apples, not apples to cucumbers.


Confused