Worth the upgrade?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

Il Tue, 29 Jun 2004 21:35:00 +0100, Ben Pope ha scritto:

> _P_e_ar_lALegend wrote:
>>>
>>> I disagree, the drives and controllers probably similar prices, with PATA
>>> being a smidgen cheaper.
>>
>> Please... try Raid0 on SATA150 (SiliconImage, just to name a popular
>> choice) and we can talk. No need to buy 3Ware, no, SiliconImage is enough
>> 🙂
>
> I have no great desire to try RAID 0.

Ohhh! Why that? It's a big improvement in performance.

>> And, bien sur, u have to configure the drive in Raid0 mode. But also drive
>> against drive, I mean single ATA133 against single SATA150 drive make a
>> relevant difference in every day use.
>
> Which drives are you comparing?

Oh well, nothing sooo esotic: just simple Maxtor with 8MB of cache. There
is a LOT of difference between ATA and SATA models, especially if u run
them in Raid 0 mode.
>
>> And it's just stupid in this days buy ATA and not SATA, also if u think
>> about Raid configuration, and also if u just think in performance
>> terms.
>
> What about RAID? Performance how?
>
Raid 0 is in real life perfomance two times faster than a single drive.
It's like loading data from a ram disk, on my system. ATA Raid 0 is half
less faster than SATA Raid 0.

In my opinion, in this days, there is no point to buy ATA.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

> > SATA is much faster than standard IDE/133.
> >
> [snip]
>
> No, it isn't.
>
> In any disk storage subsystem, the maximum performance attainable is a
> function of the *slowest* link in the chain (i.e., the raw disk drive itself,
> the disk controller, and the host system interface). Given the drives in
> question, the host system interface is *NOT* that slowest link in either case;
> so it is largely moot from an actual performance POV. Do not confuse
> performance *potential* with "performance".

Your is theory. Try it for real.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

_P_e_ar_lALegend wrote:
> Il Tue, 29 Jun 2004 21:35:00 +0100, Ben Pope ha scritto:
>> Which drives are you comparing?
>
> Oh well, nothing sooo esotic: just simple Maxtor with 8MB of cache. There

Model numbers, please. There are loads of 8MB maxtor drives.

> is a LOT of difference between ATA and SATA models, especially if u run
> them in Raid 0 mode.

??

Why would SATA RAID give more gains than ATA RAID?

>> What about RAID? Performance how?
>>
> Raid 0 is in real life perfomance two times faster than a single drive.

Depends what you're doing.

> It's like loading data from a ram disk, on my system. ATA Raid 0 is half
> less faster than SATA Raid 0.

Really? Wow. You must have slow RAM.

Ben
--
A7N8X FAQ: www.ben.pope.name/a7n8x_faq.html
Questions by email will likely be ignored, please use the newsgroups.
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

Don't expect IDE to phase out yet... CD drive makers have no intentions on
having SATA CD drives yet.
"Leythos" <void@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b4c7b901a5de36798a6ed@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
> In article <Xns95183BDA7163tristanluscombehotma@194.117.143.38>,
> tristanluscombe@hotmail.com says...
> > Whether it be for reasons of compatibility or performance, it sounds
like
> > S-ATA is well worth the money as part of my forthcoming upgrade, the
only
> > question now being whether I can afford to get 2 and set up RAID0 or not
> > (hopefully obtaining a more favourable result than on my horrid old Abit
> > KR7A-RAID *shudder*).
>
> I think that you should reconsider using RAID-0, unless you are fully
> aware of the implications. RAID-), while fast, will do very little in
> normal home user settings, and most people, in a home user setting will
> not really benefit from it.
>
> On the bad side, RAID-0 has a much higher failure rate - due to hardware
> faults - than a single drive or a RAID-1 (mirror) configuration. No
> matter what anyone tells you, two drives are more likely to have a
> problem than a single drive, or redundant drives.
>
> My ASUS PC-DL does SATA, has two RAID controllers, and I can even hot
> swap the Promise drives in the even of a fault. I've designing boards
> and systems for more than 20 years and would never install RAID-0 on a
> users system, unless they were doing video editing and the drive
> subsystem could not keep up with the editing applications.
>
> --
> --
> spamfree999@rrohio.com
> (Remove 999 to reply to me)