burritopunk
17-05-2006 18:29:55
I'm a n00b in the world of building computers, and am currently assembling my first. I'm debating whether or not to purchase a large SATAII drive or a smaller SATAII and a standard IDE for storage. I would use the smaller SATA drive to boot XP and most of my applications off of, and would use the IDE for music, picture storage, etc. Is there any benefit to just getting one drive, or any disadvantage to the dual-drive method I am suggesting? Thanks.
Edit the only reason why I'm asking is the price. I'm going to pay more for a larger SATA drive and just want to know if it's worth it.
megotcash
17-05-2006 18:59:48
...speed would be your biggest issue, SATA are faster than IDE, so it just depends on what it's worth to you
burritopunk
17-05-2006 19:03:49
Would there be a noticable difference in speed when playing music or accessing files through an IDE drive compared to a SATA drive? Or is it mainly beneficial for speed for programs?
dmorris68
17-05-2006 19:09:53
Today, in real world performance, SATA has no speed benefit. The IDE bus isn't even hitting ATA-133 speeds, let alone SATA1 150MB/s or SATAII 300MB/s speeds.
However SATA is still desireable for several reasons
[list06d59f526f][li06d59f526f]Mobo's are reducing, and will eventually eliminate, PATA interfaces. Buying SATA drives now gives you some future-proofness.
[li06d59f526f]SATA cables are much better for clean routing in the case, for better airflow, than PATA cables. Even better than the round PATA cables, which is all I use for PATA builds.
[li06d59f526f]SATA II supports additional features such as NCQ (not really useful for desktops, but great for multi-user servers) and external/hot-swap connections
[li06d59f526f]The SATA 3G bus has greater bandwidth capacity, so you could install, say, 4 HD's in your system at once and hammer all of them simultaneously without hitting the bandwidth limitation of the PATA interface.[/listu06d59f526f]
All of those are good reasons to go with SATA over PATA. I will not buy another PATA drive for myself, I have plenty of spares to keep my old system running. All new system builds get SATA only.
ajasax
17-05-2006 23:18:47
In fact, I'm also building a computer this summer. I'm going the route you described (10,000rpm SATAII ~80GB for OS/Programs, IDE for storage). I just think SATA is too expensive right now to use it for storage. I don't think you'll notice any difference anyways playing music/videos off your IDEs. I bought a 300GB IDE the other day, and I'm making sure I get a mobo that supports PATA. Even the most high-end mobos still support it. Even socket 939s, which is what I'm gonna use for my build.
kyks17
18-05-2006 02:55:35
i dunt really see that big of a price difference between SATA and IDE anymore, assuming of course you're getting them on sale. I got a 300gb SATA drive about 6 months ago for $80, and i've found it to be much faster in loading media files, extracting large archives, etc. i also agree that it is much better in terms of cords for cooling purposes. i say go for the SATA D
mikedb
18-05-2006 04:27:39
In my computer building experience, there is no speed difference between any of the interfaces.
Also, for the (typical) end user, there are no differences in the features between any of the interfaces.
This seems to be why the IDE interface still lingers after two years - there is no difference in price, and no advantage to newer interfaces.
I am finally starting to see less and less IDE, so it is definetly the best idea to get SATA... if anything, get it simply for the (much) smaller cables.
Finally, it has been mentioned at least once that SATA is more expensive, which is simply not true to any great extent.
In summary, get a SATA drive.. its the clear choice.
Mike