Originally posted by: epsilon9090
unless you get a drive above 7200 rpm, sata offers no advantage. its primary use is that it lest the regular ide slots stay open for optical drives, giving them their own ide channels, which greatly increases performance there. sata is good.
Originally posted by: NightCrawler
Sata are nice thin cables instead of those fat crappy ribbon cables. Performance isn't much difference because the hard drives are the limiting factor.
Sata 300 will bring some nice new features though like NCQ and Hot Swapping.
Originally posted by: kabob983
So, at the moment at least, UATA should run close to the speed of SATA, correct? I need to get a new HD sometime, and I see that UATA tends to be alot cheaper than SATA, so I was wondering.
-Kabob
and optical drives that are SATA are literally useless...no drive even comes near ATA33....
Originally posted by: dnuggett
and optical drives that are SATA are literally useless...no drive even comes near ATA33....
Not so. The main reason for SATA w/ optical drives is that they have their own dedicated channel, not chained together. This can greatly increase performance depending on usage and current setup.
Originally posted by: jiffylube1024
Originally posted by: dnuggett
and optical drives that are SATA are literally useless...no drive even comes near ATA33....
Not so. The main reason for SATA w/ optical drives is that they have their own dedicated channel, not chained together. This can greatly increase performance depending on usage and current setup.
I don't think existing as master/slaves really hurts performance much or at all in optical drives.
I still really want SATA optical drives (and more connectors standard on the motherboard; 4-6 of them instead of 2-4 usually) because the cables are so much thinner and it greatly reduces clutter in the case/improves airflow.
Even rounded ATA cables are cumbersome.