real world performance differance between PATA and SATA??

Wadded Beef

Banned
Dec 15, 2004
1,482
0
0
any noticible differance in speed? or is there even a measurable speed increase going to sata on a 7200rpm drive?
 

Cook1

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2004
6,315
0
86
Nope

But my SATA HD's are quietier then my EIDE Drives, and the cabling takes up less space (yes I was using round cables).
 

Cook1

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2004
6,315
0
86
Heard that the Seagate Barracuda's were nice quiet drives, fell into peer preasure, took the plunge and have been really happy.
 

shoRunner

Platinum Member
Nov 8, 2004
2,629
1
0
there will be no performance difference because they are the same drives just with different connectors
 

SrGuapo

Golden Member
Nov 27, 2004
1,035
0
0
SATA and PATA have no inherent speed differences.

I like SATA because my 7200.7 SATA was on sale for less than the PATA equivalent. The smaller cables are definately a plus and well worth the extra few bucks, as well...
 

mechBgon

Super Moderator<br>Elite Member
Oct 31, 1999
30,699
1
0
I bought a 200GB Seagate 7200.8 SATA drive and it gets chewed up and spat out by my old Cheetah 15k.3 on I/O-intensive work projects. Change one component in my system and double my task-completion times in exchange for 11x the storage capacity (at half the cost)... has its pros and cons, I guess. The SATA drive will be fine for video-capture storage as long as it doesn't fail prematurely, but I have no plans to kick the SCSI habit for boot, apps and heavy work. :evil:
 

airfoil

Golden Member
Jan 17, 2001
1,643
0
0
Originally posted by: mechBgon
I bought a 200GB Seagate 7200.8 SATA drive and it gets chewed up and spat out by my old Cheetah 15k.3 on I/O-intensive work projects. Change one component in my system and double my task-completion times in exchange for 11x the storage capacity (at half the cost)... has its pros and cons, I guess. The SATA drive will be fine for video-capture storage as long as it doesn't fail prematurely, but I have no plans to kick the SCSI habit for boot, apps and heavy work. :evil:


Mech, now you've got me thinking. How would those SCSI babies perform against say, a Raptor?
 

mechBgon

Super Moderator<br>Elite Member
Oct 31, 1999
30,699
1
0
Originally posted by: airfoil
Originally posted by: mechBgon
I bought a 200GB Seagate 7200.8 SATA drive and it gets chewed up and spat out by my old Cheetah 15k.3 on I/O-intensive work projects. Change one component in my system and double my task-completion times in exchange for 11x the storage capacity (at half the cost)... has its pros and cons, I guess. The SATA drive will be fine for video-capture storage as long as it doesn't fail prematurely, but I have no plans to kick the SCSI habit for boot, apps and heavy work. :evil:


Mech, now you've got me thinking. How would those SCSI babies perform against say, a Raptor?
I don't have any firsthand results on that faceoff, since I can't blow the price of a Raptor just for curiosity's sake. I'd expect the faster seek times on the Raptor to help it with the stuff I have in mind. How much, I dunno for sure.
 

shoRunner

Platinum Member
Nov 8, 2004
2,629
1
0
Originally posted by: mechBgon
Originally posted by: airfoil
Originally posted by: mechBgon
I bought a 200GB Seagate 7200.8 SATA drive and it gets chewed up and spat out by my old Cheetah 15k.3 on I/O-intensive work projects. Change one component in my system and double my task-completion times in exchange for 11x the storage capacity (at half the cost)... has its pros and cons, I guess. The SATA drive will be fine for video-capture storage as long as it doesn't fail prematurely, but I have no plans to kick the SCSI habit for boot, apps and heavy work. :evil:


Mech, now you've got me thinking. How would those SCSI babies perform against say, a Raptor?
I don't have any firsthand results on that faceoff, since I can't blow the price of a Raptor just for curiosity's sake. I'd expect the faster seek times on the Raptor to help it with the stuff I have in mind. How much, I dunno for sure.


15000rpm vs 10000rpm...15000 wins
 

Guild

Member
Jul 31, 2003
191
0
0
I've got a good test for someone to try, but requires four very similar HD's (two SATA and two PATA.) Fill up a SATA and PATA with identical data, then image them to thier respectively similar brethen. (S to S; P to P) I haven't had the opportunity to compare this way in a single session, but the SATA's I've imaged seem to be faster. Could just be placebo affect.