Real SATA

floppybootstompfloppybootstomp Greenwich New
edited April 2004 in Hardware
I remember reading somewhere that only one manufacturer makes genuine SATA drives, the rest are just paralell with interfaces.

Is that correct?

If so, which make is that then?

I'll be buying a single SATA drive shortly, either 80Gb or 120Gb, not decided on which make yet. Leaning towards Seagate or Samsung, but I sure would like to know who's the maker of 'genuine' SATA drives.

Comments

  • ShortyShorty Manchester, UK Icrontian
    edited April 2004
    Floppy,

    I believe it was Western Digital :)
  • floppybootstompfloppybootstomp Greenwich New
    edited April 2004
    Thanks for that Shorty. Yes, I think you're right, now I think about it.

    Hmm, their SATA drives start at 160Gb (non-Raptor). Oh well, can always use extra space ;)
  • muddocktormuddocktor
    edited April 2004
    FBS, I'm sure that someone will correct me if I'm wrong but I think that the only true SATA drives WD makes are the Raptors, the 7200 rpm drives are conversions.
  • ShortyShorty Manchester, UK Icrontian
    edited April 2004
    Every other Serial ATA is just a bridged IDE. Raptors are the only true serial ATA's. You are correcto Jim :)
  • floppybootstompfloppybootstomp Greenwich New
    edited April 2004
    muddocktor wrote:
    FBS, I'm sure that someone will correct me if I'm wrong but I think that the only true SATA drives WD makes are the Raptors, the 7200 rpm drives are conversions.

    Oh bugger :(

    Too late now, I did find a WD 120Gb Sata drive eventually, at Dabs (UK Supplier).

    Have ordered that and the Linskys router I was talking about over in another thread.

    Not that big a deal really, I suppose :)
  • ShortyShorty Manchester, UK Icrontian
    edited April 2004
    Trust me, the WD Serial ATA standards are fast drives... Serial ATA has a long way to go before it really is in anyway removed from being glorified IDE.

    Remember, current controllers all run through the PCI bus.. so that kills any extra performance they may have (yes, even raptors too!). The only reason Raptors smoke?? 10k rotation and a damn fast access time. Makes the difference.

    The one you got will be nice and fast, no need for ---> :( in anyway :)

    That Linksys is tidy as well.. nice shopping day :cool:
  • a2jfreaka2jfreak Houston, TX Member
    edited April 2004
    AFAIK none of the drives available today are full-spec* SATA. I don't know about the Raptor's being non-bridged (perhaps they are) but the other WD drives (unless recently changed) were bridged last I read. Seagate might produce a non-bridged SATA drive, but even then it wouldn't be full-spec*.

    * full-spec meaning uses all of the advanced features SATA allows.
  • ginipigginipig OH, NOES
    edited April 2004
    All I know is.. 4x Raptors in raid-0 = RoXoRs my BoXoRs
  • floppybootstompfloppybootstomp Greenwich New
    edited April 2004
    ginipig wrote:
    All I know is.. 4x Raptors in raid-0 = RoXoRs my BoXoRs

    Well I have two x Raptors in RAID 0 so I guess at least half my BoXoR is RoXoR'd, lol :bigggrin:
  • MissilemanMissileman Orlando, Florida Icrontian
    edited April 2004
    Sorry to disagree with you all, but Seagates are the only true SATA drives. They are full spec and do command queing. All others including the Raptors are bridged drives. Even the Hitachi "DeathStars" I just got are bridged. Raptors get their speed from RPM's not their interface.

    Quote from Tom's hardware : "The serial ATA interface is enhanced with a feature from SCSI: Native Command Queuing. Seagate's 7200.7 is the only native SATA interface commercially available, while Western Digital intends to accommodate the low-end server market with its new 74 GB Raptor". This implies a bridged interface for the RAPTORS. All other Western Digital drives are bridged with a marvel bridge chip. Even their latest released non Raptors. If they have a working native SATA design it would make sense to use it in all your drives wouldn't it ?

    Don't get me wrong. Bridged doesn't mean slow by any means. I bought my Hitachis to replace my Seagates because the Hitachis are much faster. Almost as fast as Raptors without the cost.
  • a2jfreaka2jfreak Houston, TX Member
    edited April 2004
    Missleman: Nice to have someone else backup my saying that none of the drives available today are non-bridged with the possible exception of Seagate.
  • MissilemanMissileman Orlando, Florida Icrontian
    edited April 2004
    It's always hard to find REAL info anymore with the marketing engines these companies use. Takes a lot of digging and scratching to get the whole story. Makes sense I guess to not say "These are our ATA100 drives with a built in SATA converter".

    Here's a good general info article I found about SATA drives a while back. http://www.hardwarezone.com/articles/view.php?cid=10&id=1028 . Made up my mind for me about the Hitachis.

    He does a pretty good job on general performance too.
  • floppybootstompfloppybootstomp Greenwich New
    edited April 2004
    I wished you chipped in earlier there, missileman, before I ordered the Western Digital ;)

    Almost ordered a Seagate too.

    Not that the WD will be a slouch I suppose, but, would have been nice to get a genuwine SATA drive.
  • MissilemanMissileman Orlando, Florida Icrontian
    edited April 2004
    The WDs will be fast without a doubt, but from what I have found out the controller means more to the performance than the drives. I have run my drives in identical configurations on 2 Silicon Image controllers (3112, 3114) and the Intel and the Intel controller just screams by comparison. I could get Atto scores in the high 90s on the 3112, 102-106 Mb on the 3114, 110-116 on the Intel. Same drives, same stripe, same cluster. Course every controller has it's own sweet spot just like the drives do. The Hitachis on the other hand do 115-124 on Atto and burst 168 on HDTach. And these are "bridged" drives.

    I tried one other little test. I turned the command que depth up in Atto from the default 4 to 8 as Sata drives are supposed to do. Intel performance went up with both RAID sets. Silicon Image barely changed. The Seagates saw slightly better increase than the Hitachis but still lagged behind. The only thing I think I have seen is the Seagates seem to handle reading and writing at the same time a little better than the Hitachis. I have a lot of apps running at once and the Hitachis seem to bog the response time more than the Seagates. Just a feeling mind you. Oh and the cpu usage in HDTach is lower on the Hitachis before you ask.

    You'll still like the Raptors. They are a true performer. At 10K RPM how could you not be? I would like to see these Hitachis at 10K.

    True SATA may make a big difference in SATA2, but in the level one stuff there is no up front advantage right now.
  • floppybootstompfloppybootstomp Greenwich New
    edited April 2004
    mm:

    Thanks for the info. It's not a Raptor I've ordered, but a WD Sata 7200 120Gb 8Mb cache.

    It's for a cheapie box I'm building solely for Win 98 & Linux. Bought an Abit KV7 board and I already had most of the other parts. Via chipset, presumably a Highpoint controller, though I haven't checked yet, haven't even opened the box, I won't start to build until HDD arrives.

    I think both Sata connectors on the board are connected to the Raid controller, I'm just hoping there's the option to run a single Sata drive on it, there usually is.

    HDD should arrive Tuesday, I'll let you know how I get on.

    And thanks again for your input :)
  • ShortyShorty Manchester, UK Icrontian
    edited April 2004
    Damn it's good to have Missileman around (and I stand corrected on my information as appropriate) :)

    Your comment about controllers is spot on. I get terrible performance using the onboard (native!) VIA controller on my MSI K8T. Yet if I use the PCI based Promise controller, my drives scream along. That's just too wierd.
Sign In or Register to comment.