• 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.

SATA II vs SATA

J

JSFLY

Golden Member
Hey guys

So im shopping for a new HD right now. Just wondering if a SATA II 3.0gb/s HD will work on a mobo that only supports SATA 1.5gb/s.

I know I can mod my mobo to SATAII but Im just too lazy! and the performance difference shouldnt be that great right?

thanks
 
Originally posted by: Extelleron
AFAIK the extra bandwidth makes little to no difference- it's like AGP vs PCI-Express.
Click to expand...

That's quite a big difference, actually. More manufacturers are beginning to convert completely to PCI-e because of it's huge advantages over AGP.
 
Originally posted by: Shadow Conception
Originally posted by: Extelleron
AFAIK the extra bandwidth makes little to no difference- it's like AGP vs PCI-Express.
Click to expand...

That's quite a big difference, actually. More manufacturers are beginning to convert completely to PCI-e because of it's huge advantages over AGP.
Click to expand...

Yes, but RIGHT NOW PCI-Express has little/no effect on performance- a 6800 Ultra AGP performs the same as a 6800 Ultra PCI-Express. Eventually, HDD's will use the extra bandwidth provided by SATA II, but not yet.
 
Originally posted by: Shadow Conception
Originally posted by: Extelleron
AFAIK the extra bandwidth makes little to no difference- it's like AGP vs PCI-Express.
Click to expand...

That's quite a big difference, actually. More manufacturers are beginning to convert completely to PCI-e because of it's huge advantages over AGP.
Click to expand...

The reasons they switched over are:

1) To escape future potential for bottlenecking when bandwidth does become a factor. Today PCIe offers no performance improvement over AGP. Again it's also hard to tell since none of the top end cards are made for AGP. But given maximum bandwidth of AGP at 2 gigs/sec, no card possibly accesses that much since X1800XT only uses up 1 gig.

2) it allows for 75 watts through the slot vs. 48 for AGP.

The difference between SATA 1 and SATA 2 is nonexistent from the performance side since today's best drives reach 75mb/sec throughput maximum (raptor 150). In fact some SATA 1 drives are faster than the fastest SATA 2 drives.

 
Originally posted by: RussianSensation
Originally posted by: Shadow Conception
Originally posted by: Extelleron
AFAIK the extra bandwidth makes little to no difference- it's like AGP vs PCI-Express.
Click to expand...

That's quite a big difference, actually. More manufacturers are beginning to convert completely to PCI-e because of it's huge advantages over AGP.
Click to expand...

The reasons they switched over are:

1) To escape future potential for bottlenecking when bandwidth does become a factor. Today PCIe offers no performance improvement over AGP. Again it's also hard to tell since none of the top end cards are made for AGP. But given maximum bandwidth of AGP at 2 gigs/sec, no card possibly accesses that much since X1800XT only uses up 1 gig.

2) it allows for 75 watts through the slot vs. 48 for AGP.

The difference between SATA 1 and SATA 2 is nonexistent from the performance side since today's best drives reach 75mb/sec throughput maximum (raptor 150). In fact some SATA 1 drives are faster than the fastest SATA 2 drives.
Click to expand...

Funny how these topics tend to get sidetrack eh? lol

Never the less.... Thanks guys!!
 
Yup...the improvement between SATA and PATA is also questionable with many HDDs. I doubt that most users will be able to notice a 10% speed improvement without benchmark software. With the average speed of a modern HDD around 55MB/sec, you'll have to move a lot of data before you'll knock off a few seconds off the processing time.

I look for noise level during normal operation and a long warranty.
 
SATA vs PATA: IMO the only noticeable difference is the cable size. Whereas one severly limits airflow if wired incorrectly, the other allows for very minimal airflow disruption.
 
You can "roll" or "fold" the PATA cable. Mine has virtually zero cross-section to impede front-to-rear air flow. Course HDD mfrs are charging a premium for SATA drives.
 
Ya the PATA vs. SATA is the same argument as AGP vs. PCIe. The reason why SATA drives are faster is because manufacturers have focused on producing SATA drives. Thus the latest technology, density, increased cache, NCQ and other speed enhancing features will only be available on SATA drives. That doesn't mean Ultra ATA-133 interface would limit real world performance of any SATA 2 drive. Ah....marketing 🙂 With intel's ICH-8 conroe chipset getting rid of parallel ATA support, I would imagine SATA DVD burners will now let me burn at 150mb/second.
 
From what I have seen and read the performance differences with the increased bandwidth of SATA II are not significant as compared to SATA I standards, that is when considered in single drive comparisons. My question would be, can the increased bandwidth be useful in some RAID arrangements? Or maybe I'm not thinking it through enough and it still doesn't matter and the HD mechanical properties still bottleneck I/O. Hopefully someone can shed some light on this...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top