Warm/Cold SATA drives available NOW!

[bwass24]

Googlegear has the Seagate 120GB Barracuda V SATA drive for $180 shipped

Newegg has the 80GB version for $172 shipped :disgust:

Both are in stock now as I write this

 

[saltedeggman]

no performance gain though

 

[kidsafe]

Meh to CA sales tax. I ended up buying an 80 GB from CDW for $139.39 + $.01 shipping because I don't really trust places like Dartel and stuff...

 

[jamesd1343]

latest maximum pc rated serial ata vs parallel and no performance gain whatsoever

 

[kidsafe]

Especially since my motherboard uses the Promise chipset running off the PCI bus, but I've always been an early adopter for everything. Read speeds do seem a bit better in a few reviews I've seen.

 

[MrDudeMan]

Originally posted by: jamesd1343
latest maximum pc rated serial ata vs parallel and no performance gain whatsoever

you will eat those words soon enough

 

[Johnbear007]

serial ATA is a joke, there will be no true performance gains. The only reason it will get better is because they wont workon parelel anymore. They would be able to keep the speeds the same. Serial ATA is lame.

 

[MrDudeMan]

Originally posted by: Johnbear007
serial ATA is a joke, there will be no true performance gains. The only reason it will get better is because they wont workon parelel anymore. They would be able to keep the speeds the same. Serial ATA is lame.

......are you dumb? or just dumb? thanks, thats what i thought.


dont get me wrong, im no SATA fanboy, but there is no need to bash newer, using that term loosely, technology. it is going to eventually reach speeds ~ 600-800mb/s transfer rate...and that is no performance gain? riiiight

 

[optoman]

The current ata drives to not use all the bandwidth that is available. The newer drives are pushing more data but it will be awhile before the 133 bus is the limiting factor.

I think the SATA thing is cool and I see dell and the other companies jumping on it in a few months. It should drive the costs down. Kind of like USB when it first came out. Hard to find and expensive. Now look at it, dirt cheap.

 

[GotIssues]

SATA starts at 150 MB/sec, and its hot-swappable (from when I last checked a month or so ago). Is that not an improvement? Bash SATA all you want, but the 150MB/sec is just a segway into the faster speeds of 300 and 600. ALSO SATA cable length can be much longer than parallel, which helps those of us that the parallel cable barely reach their CD-ROMs, PLUS, the cables are thinner and neater. It may not be faster, but its a ton better for other reasons, much like new mp3 players are better than older ones. May not have a ton of new features, new features may not seem like much, but they are smaller and sleaker.

Yes, its still limited to 133 MB/sec (assuming you are using a PCI controller), but remember overclocking? that changes the maximum bandwidth a little bit. Instead of the standard 33 MHz PCI bus, I am using a 37.5 MHz PCI bus, increasing the bandwidth out of there from 133 to something like 170 or 180.

 

[Byte]

hmmmm, i don't think these drives come with the power adapters, anyone know where to find them cheap?

 

[mrVW]

Once the price premium comes down (9 to 12 months?)...

We will all be appreicating SATA just because the cables are so much nicer.

 

[ViperV990]

There's no need for SATA drives right now, especially not Seagate when you're looking for performence, but I'm looking forward to the new chipsets with native SATA controllers running off the southbridge.

 

[Mrburns2007]

The smaller neater cable will be a godsend to system builders.

 

[edplayer]

Originally posted by: GotIssues
Yes, its still limited to 133 MB/sec (assuming you are using a PCI controller), but remember overclocking? that changes the maximum bandwidth a little bit. Instead of the standard 33 MHz PCI bus, I am using a 37.5 MHz PCI bus, increasing the bandwidth out of there from 133 to something like 170 or 180.

r u sure about those numbers?

 

[DestruyaUR]

Originally posted by: GotIssues
SATA starts at 150 MB/sec, and its hot-swappable (from when I last checked a month or so ago). Is that not an improvement? Bash SATA all you want, but the 150MB/sec is just a segway into the faster speeds of 300 and 600. ALSO SATA cable length can be much longer than parallel, which helps those of us that the parallel cable barely reach their CD-ROMs, PLUS, the cables are thinner and neater. It may not be faster, but its a ton better for other reasons, much like new mp3 players are better than older ones. May not have a ton of new features, new features may not seem like much, but they are smaller and sleaker.

Yes, its still limited to 133 MB/sec (assuming you are using a PCI controller), but remember overclocking? that changes the maximum bandwidth a little bit. Instead of the standard 33 MHz PCI bus, I am using a 37.5 MHz PCI bus, increasing the bandwidth out of there from 133 to something like 170 or 180.

First off, SATA could be 500MB/sec and SCSI would still have an edge on it because of command queueing. The only IDE drive out right now that has command queueing is the "Deathstar" 180GXP. For the confused, command queueing is what gives SCSI its flexibility and unchallenged performance when it comes to multitasking.

Additionally, PATA and SATA hard drives will max out around 90MB/sec burst speeds. So even if your "boost the PCI bus speed/up the bandwidth" argument were even true, it wouldn't make a difference. And even if that did exist, you'd only be getting 150MB/sec. 133/33 = 4.0303... x 37.5 = 151.136136... . Also overclocking the PCI bus is possibly the quickest way to kill expansion cards. Best to just lock it down @ 33Mhz.

Also don't forget SATA is a one-connection-per-connector setup, and the channels still need IRQs. ACPI makes it easier, but when you'll need separate channels for a DVD-/+RW, hard drive, etc, it'll get a bit redundant. Motherboards are just now coming with only two channels. Soon they'll have to come with at least four.

 

[zephyrprime]

Also don't forget SATA is a one-connection-per-connector setup, and the channels still need IRQs.

I bet the SATA will only require 1 irq no matter how many channels there are. The promise PATA add on controllers already only require 1 irq even though they are dual channel.

 

[devilboy215]

Originally posted by: Johnbear007
serial ATA is a joke, there will be no true performance gains. The only reason it will get better is because they wont workon parelel anymore. They would be able to keep the speeds the same. Serial ATA is lame.

Ummm.... riiiiiiiiiiiiiiigggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhht......

can you find me a 10,000 ide out there?

well there's going to be 10,000 rpm serial ata's out soon... hopefully at least...

that'll help them fill out their bandwidth...

http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/article/1589/

(i'm still waiting for a 15,000 rpm to come out before buying one...)

 

[OSULugan]

The advantages currently with SATA obviously aren't speed related. It's a new technology in it's infancy, and as most technologies, in this time you'll see little to no performance gain (and perhaps even loss) by using it. But the theoretical upper limit is much higher because of reduced noise (as you ramp up speeds on the PATA bus, you create more and more noise between the 40 seperate signals your sending), plus the increased cable length. That and you can add some new functionality that very few PATA controllers allow (such as hot-swap).

Is it better than SCSI? Depends on what you're looking for. For the same argument that Pentium 4's aren't necessarily better than AthonXPs and vice versa, the merits/benefits ATA and SCSI can be debated... mainly lying in the cost arena. If SCSI was unequivically better than ATA, ATA wouldn't still be used anywhere.

Of course, I think they really dropped the ball when they decided to not include daisy-chaining and supply power through the SATA cables themselves.

 

[Kwad Guy]

Really, SATA doesn't have command queueing? I thought the whole point of SATA was to finally have a competitive IDE based replacement for SCSI. IDE drives, no matter how great their specs, fail miserably in an environment where they are being heavily taxed by multiple simultaneous requests (think server apps). That's where SCSI shines, and that's where, I thought, SATA was going to shine...

Kwad

 

[kidsafe]

Originally posted by: Kwad Guy
Really, SATA doesn't have command queueing? I thought the whole point of SATA was to finally have a competitive IDE based replacement for SCSI. IDE drives, no matter how great their specs, fail miserably in an environment where they are being heavily taxed by multiple simultaneous requests (think server apps). That's where SCSI shines, and that's where, I thought, SATA was going to shine...

Kwad

Tagged command queuing is not specific to SCSI, ATA or FC. Support is dependent on the HDD manufacturer.

 

[Bacinator]

Speaking of SATA and junk in general.
I hope they make a SATA to CNR adapter for my PoS ECS board. That would make me warm and fuzzy. Just knowing that is, cuz I'm not about to drop any $ is SATA. Unless the CNR adapter runs equivalant to ATA/333 of course.

 

[huesmann]

WTF is the point of SATA? Maybe when thry put out 50000rpm drives...

 

[Penalty]

A couple of reviews have noted that in a direct comparison of SATA w/ ATA 133's, there was not performance gain since the drives themselves have not been improved. BUT, they also noted that there could be a significant increase in 'overall' system perfromance because the SATA's have a extremely low CPU utilization compared to the ATA 133's. That's where the SATA will help.

 

[Savard]

Originally posted by: DestruyaURFirst off, SATA could be 500MB/sec and SCSI would still have an edge on it because of command queueing. The only IDE drive out right now that has command queueing is the "Deathstar" 180GXP.

Command queueing is only ONE area where SCSI romps on IDE. More importantly SCSI drives can operate at 15,000rpm, and have MUCH, MUCH lower latency. Can you say sub-4ms access times on a Cheetah 15k.3? Also, SCSI drives are rock solid and made to run 24x7. IDE drives usually die prematurely when you run them 24x7.

Serial ATA will not help merge the gap between SCSI and IDE for very long. Serial SCSI will emerge one of these days.