[Klug-general] Hard Drives

[James Blake]

Hi James / Peter

Back when SATA first came on the scene in about 2003/2004 this was true.  SATA originally had a 150 Mbps cap which, when compared with an absolute max of 133 Mbps with PATA, wasn't that much of an improvement.  Gradual improvements to SATA, and then SATA II while PATA has stood still now means they're worlds apart.

James


On 17 Apr 2011, at 12:01, James Morris wrote:

> On 17 April 2011 11:26, James Blake <jimmyblake at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Peter
>> I guess the answer, as always, is that it depends what you're trying to do.
>> First SATA vs PATA:
>> 
>> PATA: with ATA-4 33 Mbps / with ATA-6 100 Mbps
>> SATA: 1.5 Gbps
>> SATA II: 3 Gbps
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I understood that SATA didn't really offer much over PATA... Or a SATA
> controller operating in SATA mode doesn't offer anything over a SATA
> controller operating in PATA mode. I vaguely recall when I first got
> my current system a few years ago, hdparm showed no difference. If I
> wanted to boot into Vista I had to turn SATA off, and at the time I
> caused problems when booting Linux configured for SATA with the
> controller in PATA mode. I've since forgotten all about it.  Think I'm
> using SATA now.. Not quite sure though. lspci shows Intel Corporation
> 82801IB (ICH9) 2 port SATA IDE Controller (rev 02).
> 
> James.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Kent mailing list
> Kent at mailman.lug.org.uk
> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/kent