ABXZone Computer  Forums



Welcome to the ABXZone Computer Forums forums.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-23-2006, 05:10 PM   #1
Registered User
 
moregolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,464
What is the real diff between SATA150 and EIDE?


I have two (120 & 200) GByte SATA drives. I also have a 34 GByte EIDE. They seem to be about the same speed. I just came from a full SCSI LVD nachine, with 17 GByte drives. The drives are too expensive for me, so I went SATA. Mistake? or ?

(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2006, 05:19 PM   #2
Grab Life By The Balls
 
SRTDodge05's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 7,830
Sata is the fasest and cheapest way to go. SCSI is nice if your machine can handle them and have the money to spend. so you made a good choose getting sata.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2006, 05:58 PM   #3
Registered User
 
moregolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,464
Thanks. I did like the speed of the SCSI. Just have to be humble I guess.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2006, 10:48 PM   #4
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,203
Here are some of the speeds for your consideration:

UltraATA/133 1 Gbps

SATA 150 1.2 Gbps

Ultra320 SCSI 2.560 Gbps

Ultra640 SCSI 5.120 Gbps

Cheers,

Zeppelin
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2006, 11:32 PM   #5
Registered User
 
moregolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,464
If I read that correctly, a Ultra 160 SCSI should be about the same as a SATA150, true?
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2006, 11:37 PM   #6
The race for quality has no finish line- so technically, it's more like a death march.
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 18,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by moregolf
If I read that correctly, a Ultra 160 SCSI should be about the same as a SATA150, true?
That is true and it's about the max you will get out of the PCI bus. Wait until after 9:00 tonight I will provide you with the results of my brand new 74GB Raptor and my old 74GB 15.4krpm Seagate Cheetahs (Ultra 320 SCSI). I should have a chance to run ATTO on the drives at that time on the same motherboard. There's not much of a difference. However, there is a difference between the Raptors and the Cheetahs and the usual SATA drives.
__________________

(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2006, 11:42 PM   #7
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,203
Ultra160 SCSI 1.280 Gbps

The previous 'ultra' listed was for drives like the maxtor at 133 Maxtor DiamondMax Plus 8 or 9 6E040L0 or 6Y040L0 40GB ATA/133 7200RPM Hard Drive *** Free 2nd Day

Most IDE today is at 100 Seagate Barracuda 7200.9 ST3402111A 40GB Ultra ATA/100 7200RPM Hard Drive w/2MB Buffer ***Free 2nd Day***

More info on HDD can be found here. Enjoy: http://www.storagereview.com/guide20...hdd/index.html
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2006, 11:50 PM   #8
Registered User
 
moregolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,464
Thanks. The new SATA's seem slow compared to the U160's that I had. Wish I could have afforded the bigger SCSI, but in reality, I didn't need the faster speed. More of a nicety than a necessity.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2006, 12:20 AM   #9
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,203
I can understand how it can bug you. I am running my games on my game box off of an IDE drive. The previous installation was on a SATA raid 0 setup and the games loaded very much faster.

edit fixed typos

Last edited by Zeppelin : 01-24-2006 at 02:37 AM.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2006, 12:39 AM   #10
The race for quality has no finish line- so technically, it's more like a death march.
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 18,159
With all the computer builds I've been through, I discovered that I did not have a photo editor installed just yet. So, I used the MAC - much to my surprise I did not realize that I can now save images in PDF format!

My SCSI had odd results for the write speeds with smaller files. Overall, the Raptor did the best. However, the old Maxline II SATA and the Raptor did quite similar with the smaller files.
Attached Images
File Type: pdf Intel955Drives.pdf (44.0 KB, 8 views)
__________________

(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2006, 02:40 AM   #11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,203
You will find lots of nice surprises on the Mac. Screen captures and partial screen captures rule!

OK, the SCSI won, by a little, but what RPM and which SCSI iteration?
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2006, 09:36 AM   #12
The race for quality has no finish line- so technically, it's more like a death march.
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 18,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeppelin
OK, the SCSI won, by a little, but what RPM and which SCSI iteration?
Post #6 gave that information.
__________________

(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.0.1
vBulletin Skin developed by: vBStyles.com