Tom's Guide | Tom's Hardware | Tom's Games
 |
 |
 |
i may have answered my own question by what i am about to put so here i go my IBM DESKSTAR (DEATH STAR) 120GB gave me the message disk boot failure message so after a few restarts to get back into windows i managed to backup all data onto me maxtor 120 i have ordered a new SATA 250 gb drive but the peeps at amazon sent me the 80gb by mistake ive sent them the 80gb back and hope to see me new 250gb sata soon ive got the controller card n everything . Until then i was in need of a (temporary drive) i fished out an old 40gb ibm deskstar in the hope of recovering it. I Have re-Wrote the 00s on it managed to install windows and all on it ok but it runs at a slower speed than expected i have tried various HD diagnostic tools and it says it passes ok and done disk defrag and disk cleanup except when i did the windows one did steps 1-3 ok but got to step 4 just didd not seem to want to know. any thoughts
The simplest solutions are the best and they are often save you money
Is there any particular reason why you opted for a controller card & SATA HDD instead of sticking with IDE? Don't say "because it will run faster"
"And that's the fishing line, because Sharkboy said so!"
0 
..... ive been told by alot of people the data transfer rate is alot faster than IDE
The simplest solutions are the best and they are often save you money
0
The Theoretical tranfer rate using native SATA II controllers is faster. In practice there is little difference. When using a PCI based SATA controller card the transfer rate MIGHT actually be slower. First off, the controller card would need to be SATA II capable and of course the drive would need to be SATA II. Even then Sharing of the PCI bus would mitigate the speed somewhat IMO.
0
In addition to Othehill excellent comment, you should also read what Sabertooth wrote HERE in Response Number 3. He also used advertised vs real world analogy.
BTW The "alot of people" you mentioned certainly isn't among any one of us here at CN.
i_Xp/VistaUser
0
what would ya say the pros or cons were for a sata drive?
The simplest solutions are the best and they are often save you money
0
The pros are that SATA II is the latest technology so you should be able to migrate to newer systems in the future for a longer period of time. Also slightly faster in real world conditions. Current MBoards usually have many SATA ports and only 2 IDE or less.
The cons are that you may need to install a SATA driver in order to run the drive using the SATA II speeds. Many newer computers don't come fitted with a floppy drive, which makes it difficult to install the drivers. Some older imaging softwares can't properly access SATA drives thus forcing you to upgrade the software.
SATA optical drives are not ready for prime time yet, IMO. No speed advantage either.
0  |
 |
 |
This post is quite old and has been locked from receiving new replies. Please create a new posting instead.
| Ads by Google |
