SATA3, eSATA, SATA-6GB ???

[mgrmgr]

SATA3, SATA-6GB, eSATA. I looked at SATA on Wikipedia, but for someone with serious reading and concentration issues, it quickly became an indecipherable soup. The only thing clear was eSATA which seems to be simply an existing standard for connecting external drives (right?). But SATA3 and SATA-6GB left me in the ditch...they seem to be the same thing with different names...and not available yet.

I'll be getting a new machine after Win7 releases. Do I have a hope of getting it with the new SATA3/SATA-6GB standard? The machine will have a RAID-0 pair of small SSDs but I keep hearing they'll bottleneck under the current SATA standard. Sure would be nice if that problem evaporated before October 22.

Are there any reliable predictions about what/when?

 

[alyarb]

AMD's next gen southbridges will be out in spring of 2010 and will feature SATA-600. SATA 3/SATA 3.0 is an incorrect reference to SATA-600. Seeing as how intel's P55 doesn't have SATA-600 either, I think you're looking at spring 2010 for the new ICH also.

SSDs in RAID0 will bottleneck a single SATA channel, but each drive is connected to a separate channel when you use SATA RAID. The problem is that these drives are developing so fast that soon a single drive will be faster than a single SATA-300 channel, and that is where the new standard comes in.

 

[mgrmgr]

Thanks much for the clarification on SATA-600. Ouch on spring 2010 for its arrival...but then it's okay because SATA RAID uses two channels. OTOH, on the few brief early discussions about the OCZ Colossus, more than one person has said that it will have bottleneck problems. If that's true, is it because the drive is a "single" drive with internal RAID-0 and so would use only a single channel...or were they just making pessimistic guesses?

 

[alyarb]

the colossus is divided into a two halves and connected via a RAID controller (which gets a single channel to the host), but they are only boasting 260MB/s, which is within the capability of SATA-300. Future versions of this implementation are going to run into bottlenecks with SATA 300, but they are in the clear for the time being.

 

[Cookie Monster]

SATA 1.0 = SATA 150 = 1.5GB/s
SATA 2.0 = SATA 300 = 3GB/s
SATA 3.0 = SATA 600 = 6GB/s

eSATA is just an external SATA connector (speed probably depends on the motherboard/SB and what the external drive supports)

 

[mgrmgr]

Thanks for the SATA names and GB/s figures...and for the reassurance that the Colossus won't run out of SATA-300 headroom.

 

[ilkhan]

close, but not quite.
SATA 1.0 = SATA 150 = 1.5Gb/s=150MB/s
SATA 2.0 = SATA 300 = 3Gb/s = 300MB/s
SATA 3.0 = SATA 600 = 6Gb/s = 600MB/s

and yes, esata is, AFAIK, just a connector standard for outside the case connections at full speed.

 

[Emulex]

sas-6gb been around for a while now. drives and all. not sure why you'd need it unless you have a monster SSD or port expander.

they just need to ditch sata and move to sas. not sure why they don't.

 

[TemjinGold]

Originally posted by: Emulex
sas-6gb been around for a while now. drives and all. not sure why you'd need it unless you have a monster SSD or port expander.

they just need to ditch sata and move to sas. not sure why they don't.

Cost is likely the reason. SAS is too expensive to be as mainstream as SATA.

 

[mgrmgr]

Originally posted by: Emulex
sas-6gb been around for a while now. drives and all. not sure why you'd need it unless you have a monster SSD or port expander.

The more I hear about this the more confused I get. Trouble is I don't know enough to separate out the comments that SSDs in RAID-0 can run into the SATA-300 wall and the differing opinions that this won't happen as Alyarb says above.

I've actually seen benchmarks that "prove" out the bottleneck theories but, much as I've looked, I've not been able to find them again. Maybe I dreamed 'em.

I'll be buying a high end Photoshop and HD video editing system when Win7 releases, and it seems like good future-proofing to get SATA-600 if possible, no? I'll have the machine for quite awhile and I'm not one who wants rebuild a computer in a year or two.

If SATA-600 is already here, who has it? I've looked around as much as I know how and haven't found any mobos with it. Did I miss them?

If I had a machine with SATA-600, would today's SSDs take advantage of it (if the SATA-300 SSD/RAID-0 bottleneck is actually a problem)?

I feel like grass trying to understand coyote! :-}

 

[taltamir]

1. there is no drive ON THE MARKET that maxes out SATA2 (3Gb/s).
2. People ESTIMATE the SSDs will SOONISH max out SATA2 and thus we need SATA3. I agree, but it has not happened yet.
3. Speeds:
SATA = 1.5 Gb/s
SATA2 = 3 Gb/s
SATA3 = 6 Gb/s
Gb = GigaBIT not GigaBYTE
SATA2 is often called SATA 3G
SATA3 is often called SATA 6G

There is no mobo out there that gives you that speed at the moment.

 

[mgrmgr]

Originally posted by: mgrmgr
If SATA-600 is already here, who has it? I've looked around as much as I know how and haven't found any mobos with it. Did I miss them?

No sooner said than I have to correct myself. From SlashGear and other sites...

"ASUS P6X58 Premium motherboard with USB 3.0 and SATA 6Gb/s"
http://www.slashgear.com/asus-...and-sata-6gbs-2149837/

It's not buyable yet, but indications are that it's real and near. By the time Win7 releases on October 22, hopefully it will be available.

Anyone have hard information?

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: ilkhan
close, but not quite.
SATA 1.0 = SATA 150 = 1.5Gb/s=150MB/s
SATA 2.0 = SATA 300 = 3Gb/s = 300MB/s
SATA 3.0 = SATA 600 = 6Gb/s = 600MB/s

and yes, esata is, AFAIK, just a connector standard for outside the case connections at full speed.

O yea. I meant Giga --> bit <---

Sorry for the confusion.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: mgrmgr

Originally posted by: mgrmgr
If SATA-600 is already here, who has it? I've looked around as much as I know how and haven't found any mobos with it. Did I miss them?

No sooner said than I have to correct myself. From SlashGear and other sites...

"ASUS P6X58 Premium motherboard with USB 3.0 and SATA 6Gb/s"
http://www.slashgear.com/asus-...and-sata-6gbs-2149837/

It's not buyable yet, but indications are that it's real and near. By the time Win7 releases on October 22, hopefully it will be available.

Anyone have hard information?

I would personally wait til Intel/AMD releases a new SB/ICH that supports the new standard instead of buying mobos that are using 3rd party chips for such standards. They are often plagued by poor performance or issues compared to the AMD/Intel counterparts.

 

[ilkhan]

Originally posted by: Emulex
sas-6gb been around for a while now. drives and all. not sure why you'd need it unless you have a monster SSD or port expander.

Since consumer SSDs are already but limited by SATA 3Gbps, doubling their speed is a good thing.

Of course, SSDs are pretty easy to scale (just add more channels to the controller), so when they get SATA 6Gbps interfaces, they'll still be bus limited, just at twice the seq read sped.

I've bought into a 3Gbps SSD and a USB2 32GB flash drive, but my next purchase for each will require the new buses and occur when I get a mobo that supports those buses.

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster

Originally posted by: mgrmgr

Originally posted by: mgrmgr
If SATA-600 is already here, who has it? I've looked around as much as I know how and haven't found any mobos with it. Did I miss them?

No sooner said than I have to correct myself. From SlashGear and other sites...

"ASUS P6X58 Premium motherboard with USB 3.0 and SATA 6Gb/s"
http://www.slashgear.com/asus-...and-sata-6gbs-2149837/

It's not buyable yet, but indications are that it's real and near. By the time Win7 releases on October 22, hopefully it will be available.

Anyone have hard information?

I would personally wait til Intel/AMD releases a new SB/ICH that supports the new standard instead of buying mobos that are using 3rd party chips for such standards. They are often plagued by poor performance or issues compared to the AMD/Intel counterparts.

if you read the article you would see that they are already doing a silly juggling thing...
They connect 4x pcie v1 x1 links (250x4 = 1000MB/s) from the P55 to a special bridge chip which upconverts it into 2x pcie v2 x1 links, which will connect via 1x pcie v2 x1 link (500MB/s) to a SATA3 chip.
which will provide one SATA3 @ 600MB/s to the drive...
problems are:
1. waste of some resources off of the P55 by allocating too many links.
2. the link in the middle is limited to 500MB/s. below the full speed of SATA3.
3. latency suffers due to passing through many chips.
4. reliability is probably gonna suffer due to all the chips involved
5. cost is gonna go up due to having multiple nested bridge chips.

this is just for ONE PORT. all the others are SATA2.

Basically, realistically, you need to wait for a new chip to provide native SATA3 reasonably.

 

[alyarb]

http://www.serialata.org/devel.../naming_guidelines.asp

The term "Third Generation SATA technology" refers to the SATA 6Gb/s data transfer rate. Don't confuse "Gen 3" with a 3Gb/s Transfer rate. "Gen 2" was associated with 3Gb/s and often confused with the misnomer "SATA II." Do not use the terms "SATA II" or "SATA III," which are incorrect and have no meaning. In the past, the term "SATA II" sometimes was mistakenly used as a moniker for the SATA 3Gb/s data transfer rate, causeing great confusion with customers because, quite simply, it's a misnomer.
.
.
.

Terms to Avoid

Gen 3

SATA III

SATA 3.0

substituting "SATA III" for "SATA 3.0" is even more confusing because it sounds like you're referring to 3gigabit. Just get it right the first time and use the bandwidth naming convention, not the revision naming convention.



also, it's amazing how much trouble ASUS went through to get one SATA-600 port working on that board. not surprised, just a little disgusted.

wait for ICH11.

 

[hanspeter]

Originally posted by: taltamir
1. there is no drive ON THE MARKET that maxes out SATA2 (3Gb/s).

What happens if you connect more than one drive to the same bus?

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: hanspeter

Originally posted by: taltamir
1. there is no drive ON THE MARKET that maxes out SATA2 (3Gb/s).

What happens if you connect more than one drive to the same bus?

The only possible way to do that would be a splitter, and I have never seen one (because that would be dumb).
The whole point of SATA is to make things "simple" and compact... each cable connects 1 drive to one port, each port leads directly to the controller (the southbridge in most cases), which has a dedicated bandwidth allocated to each one of them

 

[hanspeter]

It is called a port multiplier...

 

[taltamir]

the only port multipliers i have seen for SATA connect one internal SATA gen2 to 5 EXTERNAL gen1
now i am sure it can be done. but what is the POINT. upgrading, at great cost, to SATA gen3 to allow port multipliers without speed loss is, well, an extremely low priority

 

[ilkhan]

people don't use port multipliers for speed, they use them to get more ports for less money than a new controller.

 

[mgrmgr]

Originally posted by: taltamir
[Basically, realistically, you need to wait for a new chip to provide native SATA3 reasonably.

DAMN! And I slept soooo well last night dreaming of new SATA-600/USB-3 motherboards only to wake up to reality this morning (actually afternoon). Dreaming wins hands down...I was really enjoying the hot new standard. :-}

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: ilkhan
people don't use port multipliers for speed, they use them to get more ports for less money than a new controller.

exactly, to save money... so who is going to take their hot new future SSD that wasn't even created yet that maxes out gen2 SATA. pay a premium for a gen3 SATA controller / mobo, and then plug in a port multiplier (that is capable of gen3 SATA speeds from input port, again, nothing of that sort exists yet) to split into multiple lower speed ports...

You can't just mix extreme budget with extreme high end like that.

this is why there is no nehalem mobo with AGP. It is why you cannot find high end SSD drives with IDE interface.

 

[hanspeter]

The port multiplier doesn't split the signal to lower speed ports. What it does is split the bandwidth between more channels. You wondered about no single harddrive could use all the bandwidth alone... You can use all the bandwidth if you connect more drives.