IDE vs SATA

January 3, 2011 at 02:21:33
Specs: Windows 7, 2gb
ok i've been searchin for a while now
and they say there is no difference between and IDE n a SATA hard drives except for their interface
but they also said it depends what will u do
so as u can see on my specs i got a 80GB IDE and a 320GB SATA
currently i'm using windows on SATA ( splitted in to 2 partition )
should i change to IDE for windows?
coz 80GB is enough for me for using windows coz i installed programs and games on my SATA partition 2 but i'm worried if it effects the perfomance of my windows

p/s ; sorry if my english is bad

ASUS P5QPL-AM
Intel Pentium Dual Core E5400 2.7Ghz
2GB 800Mhz DDR2 Ram
320 Gb Sata HDD
80 GB IDE HDD
Intel GMA X4500
TP-link TL-WN721N
Windows 7 Ultimate 32bit


See More: IDE vs SATA

Report •


#1
January 3, 2011 at 03:36:15
sata is 2x faster than IDE.
becuz, IDE give Analoge signal and sata gives Digital signal.

Report •

#2
January 3, 2011 at 04:02:50
ok thanks for the info
i'll use the IDE for movies

ASUS P5QPL-AM
Intel Pentium Dual Core E5400 2.7Ghz
2GB 800Mhz DDR2 Ram
320 Gb Sata HDD
80 GB IDE HDD
Intel GMA X4500
TP-link TL-WN721N
Windows 7 Ultimate 32bit


Report •

#3
January 3, 2011 at 05:02:54
There's no big difference between sata 150mb/s and ide 133mb/s devices. But there's difference between ide 133 and sata 300/sata II. Your 320hdd is faster than 80gb hdd why? 80gb has less cache(2mb) while 320gb has 8 or 16mb of cache, no TCQ or NCQ for 80gb hdd while many sata II hard drives support NCQ.

We can not fight new wars with old weapons, let he who desires peace prepare for war - PROPHET.


Report •

Related Solutions

#4
January 3, 2011 at 05:16:02
SATA is a incremental advance in hardware. It is better than IDE in some respects and no different in others. Neither interface can actually run continuously at their rated speeds.

If your newer SATA drive is one of the green versions it may actually be slower than the IDE. There are many variables as kuwese has pointed out.


Report •

#5
January 3, 2011 at 05:36:11
actually kuwese,i dont understand a word you're saying

ASUS P5QPL-AM
Intel Pentium Dual Core E5400 2.7Ghz
2GB 800Mhz DDR2 Ram
320 Gb Sata HDD
80 GB IDE HDD
Intel GMA X4500
TP-link TL-WN721N
Windows 7 Ultimate 32bit


Report •

#6
January 3, 2011 at 05:40:34
IDE give Analoge signal and sata gives Digital signal.

Rubbish. They are both digital, one is parallel and one is serial, but still digital.

The reason that S-ATA was developed was the P-ATA had reached the limit of what was possible with a parallel interface. One the face of it a parallel interface should be faster than a serial interface because it sends data down the line eight bits at a time where as serial sends it down one bit at a time.

But the reality is that with parallel there is a limit as to how fast the data can be sent as timing and the distance between source and destination is critical.

With the advances in hard disk technology, the hard disk was capable of reading data faster than the parallel interface could transfer it it. so the serial interface was devised. Timing is not so critical and it was possible to send data down a serial line at a bit rate that would be impossible with a parallel connection. It is for the same reason that all modern printers have USB serial interfaces, Parallel interfaces on printers are thing of the past.

When SATA was first introduced there was little to chose between P-ATA and S-ATA as the internal hardware was identical. Aa disk technology has advanced, reading and writing speeds have increased and can be made use of without the restriction imposed by parallel interface which would have slowed things down.

Both P-ATA and S-ATA are IDE devices. To call a P-ATA disk IDE to the exclusion of SATA is incorrect. IDE (Integrated Device Electronics) refers to the fact that the disk controller is integrated into the device itself and is not separate as is the case with SCSI drives.

Stuart


Report •

#7
January 3, 2011 at 05:47:54
err....what?!
too much information
just tell me should i or shouldn't i use the 80GB IDE drive for windows?

ASUS P5QPL-AM
Intel Pentium Dual Core E5400 2.7Ghz
2GB 800Mhz DDR2 Ram
320 Gb Sata HDD
80 GB IDE HDD
Intel GMA X4500
TP-link TL-WN721N
Windows 7 Ultimate 32bit


Report •

#8
January 3, 2011 at 06:13:57
Thats you choice and you cannot make the right choice without all the relevant information.

Only children get told what they should and should not do without any explanation as to why.

Stuart


Report •

#9
January 3, 2011 at 06:16:06
if i can make the choice why i even bother asking here

ASUS P5QPL-AM
Intel Pentium Dual Core E5400 2.7Ghz
2GB 800Mhz DDR2 Ram
320 Gb Sata HDD
80 GB IDE HDD
Intel GMA X4500
TP-link TL-WN721N
Windows 7 Ultimate 32bit


Report •

#10
January 3, 2011 at 07:17:52
Your 80GB HDD is going to be slower no matter how you look at it & it has little to do with IDE vs SATA. The major differences in your drives are buffer size (cache) & platter density. You seem to have limited mental capacity so I'll do my best to explain it in simple terms.

The buffer is a memory chip on the hard drive that stores frequently accessed data. Reading from a memory chip is MUCH faster than reading from the platter, so having a larger buffer usually allows data to be accessed more quickly. Modern hard drives can have 8MB, 16MB, 32MB or 64MB buffer. 16MB seems to be the standard these days. If your drive only has 2MB, data will have to be pulled from the platter more often & that will decrease performance.

Platter denisty is the other issue. I'm sure both your drives use 3.5" platters so you should be able to understand that the data on the 320GB HDD has to be more densely packed than the 80GB HDD to be able to fit in the same amount of space. That means that the reading head only has to move a fraction of an inch to access 80GB of data on the 320GB HDD while on the 80GB HDD, it has to move the full size of the platter. The movemet of the reading head takes time. More time to locate data = decreased performance.

Does that help? Maybe you should be some reading:

Understanding Hard Drive Performance


Report •

#11
January 3, 2011 at 07:20:24
omg thanks mickfliq although i already some of them but thanks

ASUS P5QPL-AM
Intel Pentium Dual Core E5400 2.7Ghz
2GB 800Mhz DDR2 Ram
320 Gb Sata HDD
80 GB IDE HDD
Intel GMA X4500
TP-link TL-WN721N
Windows 7 Ultimate 32bit


Report •

#12
January 3, 2011 at 07:25:06
Bottomline - the 80GB HDD should be used for storage or eliminated altogether.

Report •

#13
January 3, 2011 at 07:27:59
another question

if i add another HDD maybe a 500GB, will it slow down my PC?

ASUS P5QPL-AM
Intel Pentium Dual Core E5400 2.7Ghz
2GB 800Mhz DDR2 Ram
320 Gb Sata HDD
80 GB IDE HDD
Intel GMA X4500
TP-link TL-WN721N
Windows 7 Ultimate 32bit


Report •

#14
January 3, 2011 at 07:31:44
StuartS
Sometimes i forget to use correct terms. Thanks for the correction

amin24.5
do u know anything about hard drives?
NCQ http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/arti...
SATA http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/arti...
PATA http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/arti...

We can not fight new wars with old weapons, let he who desires peace prepare for war - PROPHET.


Report •

#15
January 3, 2011 at 07:38:42
"if i add another HDD maybe a 500GB, will it slow down my PC?"

What will the 500GB HDD be used for? If you choose a good one, such as the Samsung SpinPoint F3, it will most likely be faster than the 320GB.


Report •

#16
January 3, 2011 at 07:39:34
a bit
i'm no a pc expert like u guys
and thanks for the links
i'll read them now

ASUS P5QPL-AM
Intel Pentium Dual Core E5400 2.7Ghz
2GB 800Mhz DDR2 Ram
320 Gb Sata HDD
80 GB IDE HDD
Intel GMA X4500
TP-link TL-WN721N
Windows 7 Ultimate 32bit


Report •

#17
January 3, 2011 at 07:42:31
@mickfliq

my both HDD are almost full.I've deleted the unimportant files but i need more space

ASUS P5QPL-AM
Intel Pentium Dual Core E5400 2.7Ghz
2GB 800Mhz DDR2 Ram
320 Gb Sata HDD
80 GB IDE HDD
Intel GMA X4500
TP-link TL-WN721N
Windows 7 Ultimate 32bit


Report •

#18
January 3, 2011 at 07:54:55
U don't use your dvd writer well.

We can not fight new wars with old weapons, let he who desires peace prepare for war - PROPHET.


Report •

#19
January 3, 2011 at 07:56:51
That doesn't answer my question.

If you have than much garbage on your drives, get rid of the 80GB HDD altogether. Use the 320GB HDD for the OS & install a 1TB HDD for storage. You can get 1TB HDDs for about $50-60. 1.5TB HDDs only cost about $10 more.

"U don't use your dvd writer well"

LMAO!


Report •

#20
January 3, 2011 at 07:58:11
kuwese,i dont have a dvd writer.my dvd drive can read only,cannot write.i'm planning to upgrade it to a DVD writer or Bluray but here DVDs or Blurays are freakin expensive

ASUS P5QPL-AM
Intel Pentium Dual Core E5400 2.7Ghz
2GB 800Mhz DDR2 Ram
320 Gb Sata HDD
80 GB IDE HDD
Intel GMA X4500
TP-link TL-WN721N
Windows 7 Ultimate 32bit


Report •

#21
January 3, 2011 at 07:59:50
mickliq, 1TB way to much for me
500gb is enough

ASUS P5QPL-AM
Intel Pentium Dual Core E5400 2.7Ghz
2GB 800Mhz DDR2 Ram
320 Gb Sata HDD
80 GB IDE HDD
Intel GMA X4500
TP-link TL-WN721N
Windows 7 Ultimate 32bit


Report •

#22
January 3, 2011 at 08:05:07
80GB + 320GB = 400GB & you said they're almost full? Seems to me 500GB is no where near enough. A 500GB HDD is about $45. A 1TB HDD is about $60. A 1.5TB HDD is about $70.

BTW, DVD writers are less than $20.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...


Report •

#23
January 3, 2011 at 08:10:14
in malaysia a 500GB cost RM200
for a kid like me , it's expensive
DVD's are also expensive here
cost RM5 a piece
DVD writer RM150
so i rather buy a 500GB HDD than a DVD writer

ASUS P5QPL-AM
Intel Pentium Dual Core E5400 2.7Ghz
2GB 800Mhz DDR2 Ram
320 Gb Sata HDD
80 GB IDE HDD
Intel GMA X4500
TP-link TL-WN721N
Windows 7 Ultimate 32bit


Report •

#24
January 3, 2011 at 08:21:42
Here pc components are super expensive but not dvd writer(tsh 40000 equal to u$d 28). A dvd disc last longer than hdd.

We can not fight new wars with old weapons, let he who desires peace prepare for war - PROPHET.


Report •

#25
January 3, 2011 at 09:29:39
amin

I would like to see the model numbers of both the 80GB and the 320GB. I don't necessarily agree that the 320 will automatically be the faster drive.

Post both model numbers.

Download SIW and use it to determine the model numbers of both drives. Look under storage. Get SIW at the link below.

http://www.gtopala.com/siw-download...


Report •

#26
January 3, 2011 at 10:39:59
Let's see if I can make this a little bit easier for ya. Are you using an application that requires more speed in the range of milli-seconds? I've got an old 14 or 15 GB drive (IDE) that came out of a computer that is more than 10 years old and I have a 1.5 TB ( Sata) drive that I have had maybe a month. Now if I sit glued to the screen chomping at the bit I may see a difference in speed that the information I try to access is displayed but it is not like I am putting my life on hold waiting for the IDE drive. If you bench test each drive I am sure on paper there is probably a rather noticable difference but once it is placed in the box with the rest of the hardware there are a ton of other variables that come into play that affect what you the user actually see. All this being said if it is so critical that you be able to access your data 1 maybe 2 seconds faster at best then go with sata if not then there is nothing wrong with IDE.

Personally what I would do is put windows on the IDE drive you have and use the other in 2 partitions. The first for programs outside of windows like games and stuff and the second for stored data. If your not a serious power user or your on a budget your not going to see a big performance gain going to sata. How many rpms does each drive spin at, 7200?

Likely


Report •

#27
January 3, 2011 at 11:41:28
Since there's so little difference, let's all go back to 4.3GB HDDs that run at ATA33 with a 512k buffer!

Report •

Ask Question