Real SATA users...

[TimeKeeper]

Several website benchmark SATA vs PATA HD. (technically there is NO performance gain according to them)

But, how about those IDE HD w/ SATA Adaptor?

Anyone care to benchmark your SATA HD and share some true experiences?

 

[Sahakiel]

I swapped a couple drives back and forth between my onboard ATA133 and the onboard SATA chip.

*shrug* didn't notice any differences.

 

[SUOrangeman]

First, SATA is only on its first iteration (150Mbps max). I believe there a plans to scale this upward.

Secondly, no one has fully integrated SATA into a chipset/southbridge. The only way to get SATA now is to add a PCI controller card or have a separate chip (as in, still not integrated into chipset and still limited by PCI bus) on the motherboard.

-SUO

 

[LethalWolfe]

Until IDE HDDs get much, much faster SATA will provide little or no performance gains under most usage. The current bottle neck is the lack of HDD speed, not lack of bandwidth to/from the HDD.


Lethal

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: LethalWolfe
Until IDE HDDs get much, much faster SATA will provide little or no performance gains under most usage. The current bottle neck is the lack of HDD speed, not lack of bandwidth to/from the HDD.


Lethal

Enter Western Digital

 

[Judgement]

Originally posted by: SUOrangeman
First, SATA is only on its first iteration (150Mbps max). I believe there a plans to scale this upward.

Secondly, no one has fully integrated SATA into a chipset/southbridge. The only way to get SATA now is to add a PCI controller card or have a separate chip (as in, still not integrated into chipset and still limited by PCI bus) on the motherboard.

-SUO

What about motherboards like the Abit NF7-S? I don't think the SATA on that HD has anything to do with the PCI bus but I guess I could be wrong.

 

[LethalWolfe]

Originally posted by: Lonyo

Originally posted by: LethalWolfe
Until IDE HDDs get much, much faster SATA will provide little or no performance gains under most usage. The current bottle neck is the lack of HDD speed, not lack of bandwidth to/from the HDD.


Lethal

Enter Western Digital

I'm lazy and uninformed. Can you post a link to what you are talking about so I can become informed?


Lethal

 

[acejj26]

judgement......on that board, sata is provided by an external controller chip...which is then connected to the southbridge via pci bus. when the sata controller is integrated in the southbridge and can talk to other components via proprietary protocols (via's v-link, sis' mutiol, etc.) the bandwidth barrier will be lifted.

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: LethalWolfe

Originally posted by: Lonyo

Originally posted by: LethalWolfe
Until IDE HDDs get much, much faster SATA will provide little or no performance gains under most usage. The current bottle neck is the lack of HDD speed, not lack of bandwidth to/from the HDD.


Lethal

Enter Western Digital

I'm lazy and uninformed. Can you post a link to what you are talking about so I can become informed?


Lethal

10,000rpm 8mb cache ide hard drives.

 

[SUOrangeman]

The WD Raptor, even though its only 36GB, should be pretty interesting.

-SUO

 

[WyteWatt]

SUOrangeman you could always buy two or three if you really wanted all your stuff on fast Hard drives or you could wait till they release a bigger 10,000 rpm 8 mb of cache WD HD.

 

[Davegod]

I think the 10k WD drive is still short of what PATA can cope with, although im not exactly certain. The drive will only come in SATA though so there will soon be a "IRL" sata vs pata performance difference, but afaik for marketing rather than technological reasons. Either way it's a step in the right direction.

[edit: "the first Raptor Series drives will be limited to 150 MB/second from the SATA Interface" says the WD man, quoted here so errr i correct myself, presuming the drive can actually do that in real world use /]

 

[TimeKeeper]

It seems like no brainer to boot from SATA controller. (w/ HD adaptor)

Currently, I can't feel the different w/ my Maxtor Plus9 HD (I am still on web browsing.....)

Now, only if I know what is the most accurate HD benchmark software out there..

 

[sharkeeper]

The WD Raptor, even though its only 36GB, should be pretty interesting.

Yes it should be. This drive could actually come up last in a lot of benchmarks (access time being the obvious exception) especially when compared to 80 GB/Platter models. The areal density is pretty low by today's standards. Areal density affects more than STR. They could balance out some of the physical deficiencies with optimal firmware and interface tuning. As always, it's a wait and see strategy.

Cheers!

 

[jamesbond007]

Well, I use to use a SATA converter on my Seagate Barccuda IV 7200 RPM until I wanted to add a second drive. Then for some reason, the Silicon Image chip in my Intel D845PEBT2 motherboard won't detect 2 drives at the same time. It's only one or the other. When I had both hooked up, 99.9% of the time it'd say 'No Drive Found' for both channels and the other 0.01% it would detect only one HDD.

After a few hours of tinkering with settings, jumpers, possibilities, etc, I got torked and whipped out my Promise Ultra133TX2 IDE card. That solved my issues.

I'm not sure whether or not it's the Silicon Image's fault or the converter's fault. I know when using a converter of any kind, you're never guarenteed 100% compatibility and full-functionality.

I recently realized I am using the P03 BIOS for my mainboard when P06 has been out since November. I also see the P06 updates the Silicon Image BIOS chip, which may resolve my issue. Though, I'm not 100% sure where the fault lies.

When I ran the one drive for about 3 weeks, it was fast, flawless, and booted without any problems. I'm sorry I can't give you any numbers or benches, but it didn't feel any different than it does now on my Promise controller.

FYI, I have two of the SATA converters that are reviewed here. I purchased mine from NewEgg.com.

If anyone has any pointers, tips, or suggestions, please feel free to drop an email or PM by.

 

[Pariah]

Yes it should be. This drive could actually come up last in a lot of benchmarks (access time being the obvious exception) especially when compared to 80 GB/Platter models. The areal density is pretty low by today's standards.

Not likely, the WD drive has the same areal density of current SCSI 10K drives and the Seagate, Fujitsu, and Maxtor come in at 69MB/s, 69.6MB/s, and 70.9MB/s. WD would have to mess something up pretty bad to be much off of those numbers when they have the same spinrate and platter density. Anything above 60MB/s would be a new standard for ATA plus the sure to be much faster access time and the chances of it not being the fastest ATA drive yet are pretty slim.

 

[Blain]

I just read about the SATA adapters as well. Performance looked the same, but CPU Utilization was Golden!

 

[bgeh]

Originally posted by: Blain
I just read about the SATA adapters as well. Performance looked the same, but CPU Utilization was Golden!

wow, 28% drop in cpu utilization is really not bad at all
in fact, it's great

 

[sharkeeper]

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: Blain
I just read about the SATA adapters as well. Performance looked the same, but CPU Utilization was Golden!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


wow, 28% drop in cpu utilization is really not bad at all
in fact, it's great

What a bunch of...

Something is really wrong with that setup with CPU utilisation in HD Tach over 10%. I realise HDTach is a poor metric with AMD CPU's but still. I dislike the Highpoint controller, but I've used them and the ONLY time one sees that high of a CPU hit is because they're using incorrect drivers, drive settings, or possibly have an IRQ/APIC issue.

As far as the performance of the Raptor, we'll just have to wait and see. I don't want to have any false expectations and I'm difficult to please.

Cheers!