SATA I or SATA II?

[tungst3n]

Ive pretty much been an IDE man since year dot.

I am now going to get a 250GB Sata Drive.

Just wondering what flavour to go for.

Btw I have plenty of SATA 1 cables (Both power and data), what advantages are their to either?

I have a mobo that supports them both but does not allow dor hot swap for SATA2.

What do people think?

Thanks

Tungst3n

[wazi]

i was gonna ask same thisng also

[sawyen]

dont even bother, just go for watever's cheaper.. The hot swap thingy, most normal users wont ever use it..

Actually a good quality IDE from Seagate is actually faster than most SATA drives.. regardless its SATA I or II

[pp05]

If you do then I'd advise having a SATA drive as your 2nd drive.

[vicar]

Moi, will go sata II, cables are cheap enough. Move with the times.

[NightshadowUK]

Is your motherboard SATA300 compatible?

[TooNice]

Actually a good quality IDE from Seagate is actually faster than most SATA drives.. regardless its SATA I or II

Reference?

I agree that the interface is not really going to affect the performance much. But at the same time, the Seagate is not exactly reference when it comes to performance AFAIK.

[sawyen]

I cant recall the article.. I remember reading it not TOO long ago on one of the larger sites comparing large capacity drives.. Apparently the drives by Seagate and WD are IDE and they were pitted against SATA offerings by Maxtor and WD as well.. Seagate came out on top I remembered...

, pardon my memory but I cant recall which one.. Tot I found it on Anand but those were all SATA drives..

[sawyen]

http://tomshardware.co.uk/storage/ch...2=124&chart=36

U can try Toms by selecting the 7200.8 ST3400832A.. Other than test aimed at the interface bandwidth and access times.. U can see the 400GB Seagate are amongst the top bunch, ahead of most other SATA drives (I and II)..

I know Toms can be misleading at times.. but I cant seem to recall that other article I read last year..

[scrandman]

The limiting factor is the physical speed of the drive. You'll find the performance between SATA I & SATA II is negligible in day to day use. Granted, there is twice the available bandwidth, but no drive available on the market right now even comes close to fully using the SATA I interface's 150MB/s.

I agree with the above - go with the cheapest (SATA I or II). I'd go for SATA over IDE these days, simply because the thinner SATA cables cause less restriction of airflow through your case.

[NightshadowUK]

250GB SATA300, the two best drives are:
- Samsung Spinpoint P120
- Hitachi Deskstar T7K250

[TooNice]

Umm, keeping in mind that SATA and IDE is most likely not going to affect performance in significant manner (and 500GB drives tend to be faster than 400GB drives - at least for transfer rate), the Seagate is pretty outgunned according to Storagereview.

[sawyen]

The newer 7900.9 have been unaminously voted to be crap.. the older seagates are much better..

[flcherb]

250GB SATA300, the two best drives are:
- Samsung Spinpoint P120

Yeah i got that drive its very good quick and quite

Great Stuff. :@)

Herb

[NightshadowUK]

Snap - it's an amazing drive, very nearly as quick as my Raptor, cheaper, and a larger capacity = winner!

[TooNice]

@Sawyen: It seems that the .9 get stomped by the .8 in every category people focus their attention in. But faster transfer rate does not really translate to real world performance. The .9 sweeps over the .8 there (which I consider more important).

To be honest, most 250GB drives are competitive with the Samsung on the performance front. If I wasn't looking for a drive with larger capacity, the Samsung would be on considered because it is quiet, rather than it's performance (unimpressive, but perhaps adequate, especially for a data drive). There is a 250GB HD showdown here.