• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Basic question about PATA/SATA + RAID0.

Denithor

Denithor

Diamond Member
Ok, I have a fairly basic question about raid versus non-raid and the different hdd connections. I am redoing my computer system and want to know the best way to proceed. I currently use two PATA Seagate 80GB harddrives in RAID0 configuration and would like to know how much difference (performance-wise) you will actually see (in overall system performance and specifically games) among the following options (assume 8MB cache + 7200RPM for all drives):

1) Single PATA drive
2) RAID0 PATA drives
3) Single SATA drive
4) RAID0 SATA drives

Thanks in advance,
Matt
 
Non-RAID vs RAID, you may yeild faster load times for Windows and level load times in games using RAID. Otherwise, nearly no benefit is to be had in real world use. Same with SATA non-RAID vs SATA RAID. In a SATA vs non SATA configuration, the difference will again be minimal as SATA drives, other than the Raptor by Western Digital, offer no real performance difference in real world use either. And the Raptor's benefit comes from it's 10,000 rpm's and not the fact that it is SATA.

\Dan
 
Thanks for the quick response!

So it sounds like I would be best off just keeping my current PATA-RAID0 setup.

Two further questions:
1) Is there any real difference between ATA-100 and Maxtor's ATA-133?
2) My current RAID0 is setup with both drives on same RAID port, master/slave. Would it be more effective to run them on separate ports (which my mobo, ASUS P4P800 DLX has onboard), as master/master?

Thanks!
Matt
 
I would suggest getting a couple of SATA converters for your drives. I did that with my WD 120GB 8 mb cache drive and noticed about a 10 second faster boot time. The major advantage that SATA has over PATA (other than cleaner installs and better airflow) is that it less CPU time to do the same actions. Somewhat like SCSI... SATA has a dedicated processor that handles the read-write processing and takes that load off the processor. I read an article a few months ago that tested CPU load... the PATA took as much as 43% cpu load, while the SATA cut it down to 7%. YMMV, but I've noticed a fair amount of difference going to SATA. Don't bother buying new drives though... just get the converters!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top