IDE vs SATAII Comparison Question

Cal_G · 10 Oct 2006 at 11:07

Hi have both the SATAII and IDE version of the Seagate 7200.10 320GB, here are the results of both, First pic is IDE, second SATAII:

Does this seem about right? The SATAII is nearly full, is this why it's slightly slower?

Cheers

rpstewart · 10 Oct 2006 at 11:48

This is a very interesting result and exactly what I would expect - the disks themselves are absolutely identical with the exception of the interface.

The only benefit that SATA II gives you is the ability to burst data out of the drive's cache faster than IDE can, as shown by the burst transfer differences and the "peakiness" of the SATA sequential transfer curve.

The amount of data on the disk shouldn't affect the performance figures, 0.2MB/s difference isn't enough to be concerned about in a one off test.

Cal_G · 10 Oct 2006 at 16:08

Thanks, thought it was about right myself but just wanted to be sure

Must say though, the SATAII drive makes more noise than the IDE. SATAII seems to grind were the IDE whirls (if that makes any sense), copying files between the 2 is super speed, shame my BIOS won't detect the SATAII so I can use it as the boot drive, although looking at the results, it probably wouldn't make any difference at all

ShiWarrior · 11 Oct 2006 at 16:16

SATA-II should be much faster,

IDE/ATA-6 does a transfer rate of 133 Mbps
SATA-II does a transfer rate of up to 300 Mbps

I just covered it in my Computer maintaince book thats how I know

Cal_G · 11 Oct 2006 at 22:24

ShiWarrior said:
SATA-II should be much faster,

IDE/ATA-6 does a transfer rate of 133 Mbps
SATA-II does a transfer rate of up to 300 Mbps

I just covered it in my Computer maintaince book thats how I know

As stated above, that's only the burst rate, with large file transfers it seems to make no real world performance difference at all.

MagicBoy · 12 Oct 2006 at 21:10

ShiWarrior said:
SATA-II should be much faster,

IDE/ATA-6 does a transfer rate of 133 Mbps
SATA-II does a transfer rate of up to 300 Mbps

I just covered it in my Computer maintaince book thats how I know

Why should SATA-II be much faster? The Seagate drive has a sustained read of 80Mb/sec max. 133>80.

The faster burst rate and NCQ would a small impact on performance... but nothing that equates to "much faster".

smids · 13 Oct 2006 at 01:52

ShiWarrior said:
SATA-II should be much faster,

IDE/ATA-6 does a transfer rate of 133 Mbps
SATA-II does a transfer rate of up to 300 Mbps

I just covered it in my Computer maintaince book thats how I know

Better get that revised then

.

Check my sticky for more info on SATA-II generally.

Cyber-Mav · 13 Oct 2006 at 02:21

look at the random access time between the 2 drives.

smids · 13 Oct 2006 at 02:35

Cyber-Mav said:
look at the random access time between the 2 drives.

Any number of things can affect that. How fast the heads move to seek data is not going to be different just because the external data interface is different...

The drives are excatly the same except for controller board interface chips.

ShiWarrior · 14 Oct 2006 at 11:19

Cal_G said:
As stated above, that's only the burst rate, with large file transfers it seems to make no real world performance difference at all.

Oh I didnt relise.
it's basically the MAXIMUM speed that they can do

smids · 14 Oct 2006 at 11:36

ShiWarrior said:
Oh I didnt relise.
it's basically the MAXIMUM speed that they can do

Yes, and no drive on the market can single handedly breach 150MB/s yet - the fastest can't even breach 90MB/s sustained (15K SCSI).