Back in stock!!! Seagate 160GB Ultra DMA100 8MB Buffer 7200RPM Hard Drive $49.99

[PicPop]

Outpost has the Seagate ST3160023A-RK 160GB Retail Box Ultra DMA100 8MB Buffer 7200RPM Hard Drive for just $49.99 after $50 rebate. Shipping is $4.83, always. 5 Yr Warranty!

Link to product

 

[Replay]

Nice!

Outpost has a couple of retail HD's with rebates. The Seagate looks like the best deal.
http://shop4.outpost.com/catreq/1050

 

[gotensan01]

I assume dma100 is backwards compatible to ata100 but what is it exactly?

 

[severtki]

Anyone know if this is parallel or serial ATA?

Doesn't seem like you can go wrong for $50...

 

[isekii]

I'd love to make a switch over from maxtor, but isn't outpost rebates iffy ?

also wish they had the 200gb on sale.

 

[roguesniper]

Wow thx i am working on buying the new hard drive right now

 

[KDKPSJ]

Originally posted by: severtki
Anyone know if this is parallel or serial ATA?

The description clearly says Ultra DMA100, so it's ATA5, which is PATA.

 

[severtki]

Thanks for translating. I just jumped on this -- wish me luck with the rebate!!

 

[superHARD]

Nice thanks! This will stripe nicely with the last one I got from them...

 

[Odeen]

ATA100 = UDMA/100. Serial ATA is SATA/150.

Of course transfer rates are well short of even 100 megabytes/second, so it really doesn't matter whether you go with PATA or SATA at the moment.

 

[superHARD]

Originally posted by: Odeen
ATA100 = UDMA/100. Serial ATA is SATA/150.

Of course transfer rates are well short of even 100 megabytes/second, so it really doesn't matter whether you go with PATA or SATA at the moment.

Uhh not true.

Seek times...

 

[jEnus]

Rebate good not only from Outpost. Rebate directly from Seagate.

 

[Evadman]

Originally posted by: superHARD

Originally posted by: Odeen
ATA100 = UDMA/100. Serial ATA is SATA/150.
Of course transfer rates are well short of even 100 megabytes/second, so it really doesn't matter whether you go with PATA or SATA at the moment.

Uhh not true.
Seek times...

Seek times are not depentant AT ALL on interface. Do you even know what Seek Time is? It is the time for the head INSIDE THE DRIVE to find where a piece of data resides. SATA and PATA have exactly ZERO EFFECT on this. Please don't post if you have no fricking clue. I am not gonna comment on Odeen, because he at least is mostly correct.

 

[superHARD]

Originally posted by: Evadman

Originally posted by: superHARD

Originally posted by: Odeen
ATA100 = UDMA/100. Serial ATA is SATA/150.
Of course transfer rates are well short of even 100 megabytes/second, so it really doesn't matter whether you go with PATA or SATA at the moment.

Uhh not true.
Seek times...

Seek times are not depentant AT ALL on interface. Do you even know what Seek Time is? It is the time for the head INSIDE THE DRIVE to find where a piece of data resides. SATA and PATA have exactly ZERO EFFECT on this. Please don't post if you have no fricking clue. I am not gonna comment on Odeen, because he at least is mostly correct.

I know exactly what you are thinking...but the fact is sata drives overall have a lower seek time than the older ata drives...

 

[z0mb13]

how good are they with the rebates?

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: superHARD
I know exactly what you are thinking...but the fact is sata drives overall have a lower seek time than the older ata drives...

Actually, you're wrong. Given two samples of the same-generation drive, with the same mechanics, there should be no appreciable difference in seek times between the SATA and PATA model.

If anything, if the SATA isn't native, but is using a bridge chip, then there will actually be an additional delay due to the interface, making the SATA interface slightly slower than a native PATA ATA-100 interface (since the bridged interface is really an ATA-100 interface and a command translator). OTOH, newer SATA drives support NCQ, however there are certain models of PATA drives that also support TCQ, so at the abstract protocol level, that much is a wash, and is mostly dependent on cache sizes and firmware optimizations, as well as host driver implementations. However, even though SATA NCQ can give a real-world performance increase (well, theoretically), that still doesn't change the seek times, as those are measurements based on physical performance, which is dependent on the mechanics more than anything else.

 

[John]

Thanks, I just bought one.

 

[RaiderJ]

I know exactly what you are thinking...but the fact is sata drives overall have a lower seek time than the older ata drives...

Link?

 

[STotaro]

sick price

 

[cpals]

I hate you.... I just bought the 120GB for $50 AR and now they have the 160!!!! I don't think I'll swing for it since I only need the one hard drive. argh.... do they accept more than one rebate from a household?

 

[bigboxes]

Originally posted by: Evadman

Originally posted by: superHARD

Originally posted by: Odeen
ATA100 = UDMA/100. Serial ATA is SATA/150.
Of course transfer rates are well short of even 100 megabytes/second, so it really doesn't matter whether you go with PATA or SATA at the moment.

Uhh not true.
Seek times...

Seek times are not depentant AT ALL on interface. Do you even know what Seek Time is? It is the time for the head INSIDE THE DRIVE to find where a piece of data resides. SATA and PATA have exactly ZERO EFFECT on this. Please don't post if you have no fricking clue. I am not gonna comment on Odeen, because he at least is mostly correct.

Couldn't have said it better. The HDD manufactors might make their SATA interface drives better, but in no way does this interface give said HDDs faster seek times. SATA drives have a theoretical advantage in TRANSFER rates, but that isn't realized yet except for bragging rights. But the SATA drives DO have a cute little cable that is better for cable management.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

SuperHARD must be confused, considering the Raptors as "common" SATA drives...sure in that sense you could claim that SATA has faster seek times but that's not strictly because of the SATA technology. In this case a 7200RPM 160GB PATA drive will be no slower than a 7200RPM 160GB SATA drive, they just connect to the computer using different methods (the SATA offering the "cleaner" method...)

 

[imported_amx]

seeks times are dependent on RPM. Raport 10K SATA drives ofcourse have faster seeks times then a 7200 sata. But yea no difference between SATA 7200 and ATA 7200 other then sexy slim RED cables:-D

 

[imported_amx]

oops double post

 

[Justin218]

nice, ordered one. seagate drives are my preferred choice