• 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 vs ATA133?

sep

sep

Platinum Member
A co-worker of mine has questioned the real gain to purchase SATA vs ATA133 or even ATA100 if one was building a new power user/gaming rig. The point he's trying to make is that if you take a ATA133 drive and compare it to a SATA with the same guts (nothing really changes in the drives except the interface) you don't see a performance gain. I haven't found anything to agree or disagree with that statement.

Please give me your feedback or if you know where I can read more.

Thanks,
-JC
 
If he means just adding an adapter to 1 PATA HD then he's prolly right although less CPU usage may still be taxed...Both of the 2 different interfaces are limited by the PCI Bus (xcept Intels newest chipset which still has to be proven) so neither can run @ full max. OTOH if he finds a PATA HD that will beat a SATA WD Rapter please LMK. 😉
 
oh no...that would not be fair. He's basically saying that if you take a Maxtor 120GB 7200RPM 8MB Cache drive that is ATA133 and the other one that is SATA you wouldn't see a difference.
 
Your co-worker is correct, there will be small (if any) performance gains resulting from switching to SATA. However, there are other advantages that made me choose SATA:
-not stressing PCI bus (in Canterwood anyway)
-smaller cables for better airflow
-the new standard that will be used in machines several years down the road (making the drives more reusable in new systems)
 
Originally posted by: sep
oh no...that would not be fair. He's basically saying that if you take a Maxtor 120GB 7200RPM 8MB Cache drive that is ATA133 and the other one that is SATA you wouldn't see a difference.
Click to expand...

In that Case the PATA drive may even be a touch faster because the SATA drive would have a conversion chip like Marvell involved and doye to choking of Bandwith in PCI limitations, even an ATA66 could run as fast as a 133 given the platters and rest were the same....and as User1001 stated
I wouldn't go replacing your current drive.
Click to expand...
...given the drive swap would be the same less SATA
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top