|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
Member (7 bit)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 85
|
why sata drive, why raid?
I am going to build my first PC and I am gathering information on various topics. Here is the link for my general question on building this system:
http://forum.pcmech.com/showthread.p...6&goto=newpost My question here is why should I get 1 or 2 HDs, , a sata drive or why not and why do a raid on them if I do get 2? Here's where I am so far on the build specs: http://secure.newegg.com/app/WishR.asp?ID=576822 Any comments on the equipment so far selected are greatly appreciated. I dont have fans or heat sinks selected, do I need any additional than what comes with the case? Thank you |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Member (13 bit)
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Mt Washington, KY
Posts: 4,927
|
Very short answer. SATA is direction industry is moving toward. It offers faster transfer speed (150 with potential to 600 as opposed to max of 133 for IDE). Todays SATA drives are 150. I just built this PC using SATA and frankly if I was doing it over I would go with IDE. I just don't feel the small increase in speed was worth the extra cost.
RAID can be either SATA or IDE. Two most common uses of RAID is Mirrow and Stripe. Mirrow writes everything to two drives. Great for redundancy. Stripe alternates writing between two drives. Great for speed. Big drawback is if either drive fails all is lost. Either method works best with two matched drives. For speed and redundancy you can go with four identical drives in a Mirrow plus Stripe configuration. Chas
__________________
I may not be much, but I'm all I think about. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: in harms way
Posts: 2,768
|
Sata adds more scsi commands to what we call ide, wich is a subset of scsi commands. Sata also offers reduced cpu usage, kinda like scsi. Wether a drive reduces cpu usage or adds any new commands is pretty much up to the maker. I have a sata 120g 8mb cache drive and a 40g ata133 2mb cache drive, and in the same sys they run almost identicaly in benches. Wonder what is the limiting factor here?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Member (10 bit)
|
Bottom line, if you are one of the ppl that wants the absolute best now, and you have the money go with SATA. However, if you are pnching pennies, go with IDE. The performance upgrade is prolly not worth the extra money. SATA will become better in the future. It will also become cheaper. I would wait.
-KEiTH |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 | |
|
Member (6 bit)
|
SATA is expensive?
Quote:
------------------------------- Also just another question on HD (im a noob) what is the Average Seek Time, Buffer, and Cache on a hard drive? Last edited by Rib5; 01-28-2004 at 06:41 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
Member (13 bit)
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Mt Washington, KY
Posts: 4,927
|
Re: SATA is expensive?
Quote:
Chas |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Member (6 bit)
|
SATA and RAID
Would a RAID controller work as a SATA controller?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 | |
|
Member (13 bit)
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Mt Washington, KY
Posts: 4,927
|
Re: SATA and RAID
Quote:
SATA is a storage controller like IDE. SATA currently only supports HD's and optical drives still have to run on IDE controllers. SATA starts with a transfer speed of 150 with expectations of 600 whereas IDE tops out at 133. Chas |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|