PATA versus SATA

[Rossua]

I am planning to upgrade my primary hard disk from 80GB to about 400/500GB and wonder if it would be worthwhile to get a SATA drive. Even though my system does not support SATA I am aware a SATA host adapter can be purchased which plugs into a PCI slot. Is a SATA drive a better buy or should I just go for a PATA drive ? What brands are the best ?

Thanks in advance for any advice.


Machine Spec :-
CPU : Athlon XP 2400+
Mobo : FIC AM39L, MicroATX board
Chipset : VIA KM400 (Unichrome)
RAM : 1GB DDR SDRAM
HD : 80GB Western Digital
BIOS : Phoenix Award BIOS v6.00PG
BIOS Date : 07/08/2003
OS : XP Home SP2

[Freakitchen]

My answer to your question is 'depends'. :)

The main advantage to SATA, is that it's new technology. PATA is slowly being phased out, with more motherboards having only 1 IDE (PATA) port. Its data cable is also much smaller, allowing better case airflow. It is important to note, however, that SATA drives are not noticably faster than the latest PATA (ATA-133) drives for sustained data transfer.

For that reason, I would say that adding a controller card to that system just to get SATA isn't worth it; just buy a big PATA hard drive instead.

The only instance in which I'd advise going SATA, is if you were going to build another computer anytime soon, and plan on using your new hard drive in it.

FK

[kram 2.0]

I would suggest going ahead with a PATA Hard Drive if you do not already have a motherboard with an SATA controller. There really is not glaring advantages to Serial ATA besides the fact that it's new and can hold higher thoeretical bandwidth, but on any typical daily use, the difference is unnoticible.

kram

[glc]

If you are out of IDE ports and need to get a card anyway, then I'd go SATA. I would also go SATA if you are contemplating upgrading the whole computer sometime and would want to keep the drive you are getting ready to buy - unless you would be happy putting the drive into an external USB housing and using it for backups. It won't be long before motherboards have no IDE controller at all - in fact, I set up a new Dell E520 the other day and that was the case. It had a SATA DVD burner and hard drive and no IDE port (but it did have a floppy port - go figure). The IDE controller you find on Intel 965-based boards is a 3rd party addon, Dell chose to omit it.

[MoxManiac]

Don't they make IDE > SATA converters? That could be another option if you get a IDE HDD.

Or maybe i'm thinking of SATA > IDE converters. I forget. :p

[Rossua]

Thanks for all replies. I think PATA will be the best solution. I've found an adapter card on the market which plugs into a SATA connector on the mobo and which provides an IDE connector for connection of an ATA-133 hard drive so that it can work through the SATA interface. Or failing this I could still use it in the future in an external USB housing.

As a side note has anyone had any problems with a machine made by a computer manufacturer where a hidden portion of the hard drive is used to store a full backup of the system (and no Windows CD is supplied). The problem is the OS cannot see this hidden area, and only special software supplied on a 'reload CD' which they supply can see it. When it comes to cloning to the new hard drive, the hidden area will not be transfered over, and so the backup of Windows will be lost. The only way I can see these hidden areas being cloned is by using special hard disk duplicating machines which support 'HPA', but these cost $1000's !

[glc]

I have not had very good luck with IDE/SATA converters. This is not a very good way to do it. I'd rather spend the $20 on a PCI SATA card.

Many manufacturers who load up a restore partition like that provide a utility to burn your own recovery media. If you do that, then there's usually no problem loading up a new drive. Are you sure a good cloning utility such as Acronis True Image won't faithfully copy the whole drive?

[Rossua]

I am not sure whether Acronis will handle the hidden partition, it may do. Its just that the OS itself does not see it, which is the whole idea, so that this hidden data can never be damaged no matter what happens. This 'HPA' feature was added back in ATA-4 standard. It uses a special 'SET MAX ADDRESS' command to make the drive look smaller and leave several GB's at the end for a backup area. For example, my 80GB drive shows up as 72GB in Windows. I will have to investigate further whether Acronis has the capabilities to clone this hidden partition. Unfortuneately this particular computer manufacturer (TIME UK COMPUTERS) don't provide any utility for burning your own recovery media, and they got themselves a very bad reputation indeed for poor customer service owing to this and other issues (and they are now out of business).
As a last resort I could just slave the new 500GB drive to the existing drive.
Thanks again for advice!
:)