ATA 100 or 133?

[coopns]

I am ready for a new hard drive, and I guess I will go with the most popular one recommneded here on Tom's: "Maxtor DiamondMax Plus 60".

My question is should I get a hard drive that is ATA 100 or ATA 133 and how much of a difference will it make? Noticeable?

Thanks.

Coop

 

[camieabz]

Check out the review in the storage section of the THG homepage.

<b><font color=red> DELETE THE "EVERYTHING'S GONE QUIET" THREAD!!! </font color=red></b>

 

[HonestJhon]

go ahead and get the ata-133...
the maxtor d740x is good....i have one...and it is fast.
on sisoft sandra, it scores higher than an ata 100 7200rpm drive...
cant remember how much exactly..but i do know it is a bit more.
and this is without it running at ata-133.
and on an ecs k7s5a with an athlon 900b.
i dont know about the difference between the diamondmax plus 60, and the d740x when it comes to speed and benchmarks...
but i do know that i got my 40 gig a few months ago for like 90 bucks...
so it is a pretty good deal...and if you get the retail one, you get an ata-133 controller card.

-DAvid

-Live, Learn, then build your own computer!-

 

[FatBurger]

ATA133 makes absolutely no difference in speed. Don't spend any extra to get it. I'd recommend an IBM 60GXP or 120GXP. Seagate Barracuda IV's are also good, but not many people have them.

<font color=orange>Quarter</font color=orange> <font color=blue>Pounder</font color=blue> <font color=orange>Inside</font color=orange>
Don't step in the sarcasm!

 

[Lars_Coleman]

Didn't tom say it made a 33% increase from ATA100?

UltraATA/66 doubled the bandwidth again, while UltraATA/100 provided only a 50% boost. The step from ATA/100 to ATA/133 is even smaller (only 33%) ...

Anand from Anandandtech.com claims anything under 10% you can't tell the difference (heard him say this on CNET radio about a week ago), but anything more you should. **Don't know how true that is!

<font color=red>People and hard drives are like bandwagon fans and sports!</font color=red>

 

[camieabz]

I think the wording of the review has been taken wrongly.

Toms meant 50% of the expected 33Mb/s to get to ATA100 (83Mb/s, and 33% of 33Mb/s to get to ATA133 (111Mb/s).

Or perhaps he even meant 33% of the expected 33Mb/s on top of the previous best (83Mb/s) giving 94Mb/s.

<b><font color=red> DELETE THE "EVERYTHING'S GONE QUIET" THREAD!!! </font color=red></b>

 

[kief]

The 133ATA IS 33% faster then 100ATA. However drives cant keep up so it does not matter. Remember any system is only as fast as the slowest part. If you can pump 10 gallons of water per minute from your well, and your pipes can handle 20 gallons a minute, you still only get 10!

Jesus saves, but Mario scores!!!

 

[Owl]

Quarter Pounder
IBM SUCKS
Get a maxtor ATA/133

<font color=blue>**VIA has forced Me to the dark side of INTEL, sorry AMD**</font color=blue>

 

[HonestJhon]

the only reason i said to get it was becasue when i got mine, a few months ago, it was only 90 bucks.
and it was cheaper than the IBM offerings, and even the WD offerings.
and since i had heard good things about it, since it has 40 gig platters...i decided to get it...
no sisoft sandras file system benchmark, i get 25926, which is a bit higher than a normal ata-100 7200 rpm drive.
SO...
it is either the 2 megs of cache, or the ata-133 capability.
i dont know which it is, but something is doing it.
maybe if someone out there has the ata-133 controller, and this drive, they can run the benchmark, and see what they get.


-DAvid

-Live, Learn, then build your own computer!-

 

[kief]

They will get no difference. Unless you have drives that exceed the 100 megs/second (in practice about 85 megs/second) there would be ZERO difference!

Jesus saves, but Mario scores!!!

 

[HonestJhon]

have you tested it tho?
i mean, i understand that pumping 10 gallons analogy, BUT, not only is it ata-133, but it has 40 gigs/platter.
also, if they get the ata-133 controller card that comes with the retail drive, then they can bypass the 160 or so gig limit of ata-100!
i mean, with this drive running at ata-100, i get 1,900 somethign more points on my drive index benchmark.
and that is a pretty consistant score.


-DAvid

-Live, Learn, then build your own computer!-

 

[camieabz]

IBM SUCKS

How many IBM drives have you owned/used/tested/supplied?

<b><font color=red> DELETE THE "EVERYTHING'S GONE QUIET" THREAD!!! </font color=red></b>

 

[HonestJhon]

IBM might not suck, i cant really say either way, but their track record lately has not been very good...

-DAvid

-Live, Learn, then build your own computer!-

 

[Zlash]

Exactly.

<font color=red>:</font color=red> <font color=white>:</font color=white> <font color=blue>:</font color=blue>

 

[kief]

I have not tested it myself, but thats how it works. The drive itself may be great and it may be really fast, but I bet you would get the same fast speed with the ata133 drive on an ata100 controller. In other words the drive speed itself may be fast but its no BECAUSE its ata133, its cuz its simply a fast (7200 rpm, large platters) drive!

If someone has benchmarks that prove me wrong id eat my words, but logically speaking from a knowledge of how IDE works it wont matter.

Jesus saves, but Mario scores!!!

 

[HonestJhon]

that is kinda why i was recommending it...
i said many times that it is a 40 gig/plater drive.
but this drive is an ata-133 drive, which is why i said go ahead and get it.
btw, i am running the drive on an ata-100 controller.......
oh, and i hate to sound dumb, but what exactly is the limiting factor of ide...like why it wont run that fast.
i am sure i have been told, but i just have a bad memory.
heh.

-DAvid

-Live, Learn, then build your own computer!-

 

[kief]

Well the main limit is that drives made for IDE are made more cheaply and do not perform as well, but that isnt really a limitation of ide itself. The biggest limit of IDE is that it can communicate with only 1 device at a time, unlike SCSI that can move data from multiple drives at the same time. This is important in a desktop when multitasking or paging from windows, but in a server it is critical for performance when many users can request many files from multiple drives at the same time.

Jesus saves, but Mario scores!!!

 

[Guest]

I have been working directly with hard drives since September when I quit using IBM GPX's.....I could really disrespect IBM with comments but overall their YEARS making great drives, pixie dust...etc.

For the record....on the ATA 133's with Maxtor

The DiamondMax Plus series with the beginning 5L on the drive is noisey as heck is the hottest and is ATA100/133 but specs out seriously close to the D740X.....

There are two D740X which begin by the way with 6L

The big difference is the bearing....2nd letter from the end of the drive signified by a L is fluid bearing and a J is not...

Of bunches of 40gig 540's.....none have gone bad. Of all the Maxtor DiamondMax Plus 5L series I have had two go bad......Last one just sheet the bed with S.M.A.R.T. error, I did a low level format and attempted to recertify the drive, nothing...It is extremely loud for a modern hard drive but seek time specs are in order with "average" over the counter "Best Buy" ATA100 drives....

I have been getting the deal on the new D740's 6L060J3 model which on their web site shows the Diamondmax Plus....60. I just bought this crapola 5L replacement and did an advanced RMA with Maxtor who after a complaint and CONSTANT pestering got a replacement drive 6L060L3 which is quite cool of them.

www.tcwo.com Maxtor D740X 6L060J3 60 gig ATA133 which shows UDMA 6 on my A7V266e mobo's....) Is the drive quicker.....ya....would I drive across town to buy one over the ATA100, ya because I am a nut for anything unique. However, if you don't have an ATA133 compliant bios/mobo forget it.

As so PERFECTLY stated your computer is only as fast as the slowest part. 99.9% of what I am looking for in the new clawhammer will be the DDR...I think a big bottleneck will be passed on to another area after the DDR333 is usable as standard, DDR well into the 400-500 range will be out and THEN your ATA133 will be able to quickly show capabilities. I think that is why it is only Maxtor who chose the release of ATA133. I can say burning cd's seem to not cache as much and data stream seems a bit better.

Look at the ATA133 this way...all being the same price I'd definitely go for it..at $121.00 no tax and shipped for 6 bucks hell yes. But if on the other hand the same 60 were by IBM, etc....ATA100 for $10 less how can you not justify spending the $10 bucks?

Bob..

 

[HonestJhon]

how does that have anything to do with a single drive?
that isnt the limitation of ide i was looking for...
like why the hell cant ide run at ata-133 if it is an ata-133 drive on an ata-133 controller?
i dont get where the limit is...is it the cable? is it the speed of the drive's spindle? is it the speed of the heads? i dont get it.now i feel dumb!


-DAvid

-Live, Learn, then build your own computer!-

 

[Lars_Coleman]

You need to get your series straight. Maxtor doesn't make a 5L series.

I see your point but failures have a lot to do with the user to, not just the mfg. I have FIVE Maxtor drives from the Diamond Max Plus 60 (if you want to say 5T) series that are all great drives.

<font color=red>People and hard drives are like bandwagon fans and sports!</font color=red>

 

[kief]

The liit in question is the speed of the drive, period. This is WHY ata133 does not help. ata100 is plenty fast enough to keep up with any IDE drive made today. Also keep in mind that if you have a CDROM, burner, or other IDE device on the same channel the limits of the IDE standard DOES come into play, this is especially problematic if you are reading from the cd to the hdd on the same channel. One other thing that SCSI can do IDE cant is request multiple files from ONE drive at the same time. Now yes, the drive itself can only grab one piece of data at a time, but this reduces latency.

In any case for the purpose of the main point of this post....ata 100 or 133, its the drives cant go that fast.

Jesus saves, but Mario scores!!!

 

[HonestJhon]

i still dont know what the hell you mean by the SPEED of the drive.
you mean to tell me that if this drive i have right now was running at 10,000 rpm then it would be fast enough to deal with ata-133?
you arent being very clear.
the speed of the drive means a lot of things.


-DAvid

-Live, Learn, then build your own computer!-

 

[kief]

I apologize, by speed I mean how fast the mechanical heads on the hard disk can read the data on the drive platters, and pass that data onto the ata100/133 bus. In other words the ata100/ata133 has NOTHING AT ALL to do with the amount of data the hard disk itself can read. Ata100/133 is the INTERFACE that provides a "bridge" between the physical disk and the rest of the computer. It does not matter how wide that bridge is as long as its large enough for the data that the actual hard disk drive itself can provide. I cant give you an exact number for the hard disk in question, but I can assure you there is no way the drive is going to be able to actually read the data fast enough that the "bottleneck" is the IDE channel.

If you understood the water pipe analogy then the water pump in the well is the actual hard disk. It has the ability to move so much water (data is this case) but if that amount is less then the pipe there is no problem, you are limited by the pump. ATA100/133 is like the pipe that carried the water from the pump and to the rest of your house (the rest of the computer). If your pump can push more water then then pipes can carry that would mean your limited by the pipe (ata bus) not the pump (hard disk). That is the reason that ata133 was made, to make a bigger pipe, however currently the fastest (highest rate of data read) hard disks cant keep up with the existing ata100 (pipe).

I hope that helps you understand what I mean. Ill be leaving work now so I wont be around for a while, maybe before I goto bed, but by then I may be too f*&ked up to help!

Jesus saves, but Mario scores!!!

 

[HonestJhon]

alright...well, i guess that makes sense...i just didnt know where the bottleneck was....
and what causes the heads to read so slow?
is it because they move slow? or they just arent able to read and write fast enough?
and how fast is the scsi bus?


-DAvid

-Live, Learn, then build your own computer!-

 

[kief]

The hard disks heads are slow cuz they are mechanical, as opposed to an electric signal. Anytime you have physical moving parts it will usually be the bottleneck cuz its easy to make electric signals go faster compared to physical moving parts....

Jesus saves, but Mario scores!!!