ComputerForum.com ComputerForum.com  

Go Back   Computer Forum > Computer Hardware > Computer Memory and Hard Drives

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 12-08-2007, 06:08 AM   #1 (permalink)
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Age: 29
Posts: 628
Default IDE Ultra ATE100 or SATA 3.0Gb/s

What's the difference between these two? I see a choice between two Seagate Barracuda 160GB HDs, and this is the only difference. The specs seem to match. Is one better?

Thanks.
JohnJSal is offline   Reply With Quote


Old 12-08-2007, 06:39 AM   #2 (permalink)
VIP Member
 
[-0MEGA-]'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Goffstown, NH
Age: 21
Posts: 28,943
Default

They are two different interfaces, which are not compatible with each other. If you have a SATA port, I would highly recommend it as the bandwidth is much greater and you don't have to deal with slow downs with multiple devices on the same cable, or setting master and slave jumpers.
__________________
Core 2 Quad Q9550 @ 4.1GHz
Asus Rampage Formula X48
ATI 4870 X2 2GB GDDR5
4GB (2x2GB) DDR2 960
300GB Raptor // 2x 750GB
Creative SB X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty
SilverStone 750W +12V@60A
3DMark06:
22605

www.photosbygeoff.com
[-0MEGA-] is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2007, 07:29 AM   #3 (permalink)
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Age: 29
Posts: 628
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by [-0MEGA-] View Post
They are two different interfaces, which are not compatible with each other. If you have a SATA port, I would highly recommend it as the bandwidth is much greater and you don't have to deal with slow downs with multiple devices on the same cable, or setting master and slave jumpers.
Thanks! I'm guessing this would plug into the SATA connector on the mobo then?
JohnJSal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2007, 02:12 PM   #4 (permalink)
VIP Member
 
StrangleHold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 11,175
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnJSal View Post
Thanks! I'm guessing this would plug into the SATA connector on the mobo then?
Yes
__________________
NZXT Apollo
S75QB 750W
ZEROtherm FZ120
Phenom II 720BE (X4) 3.5GHZ.
Gigabyte GA MA790X UD4P
G Skill DDR2 1066 4GB.
MSI GTS 250
Seagate 7200.12 500GB.

Welcome to the show
StrangleHold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2007, 03:24 PM   #5 (permalink)
VIP Member
 
imsati's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: EHT, NJ
Posts: 3,094
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by [-0MEGA-] View Post
They are two different interfaces, which are not compatible with each other. If you have a SATA port, I would highly recommend it as the bandwidth is much greater and you don't have to deal with slow downs with multiple devices on the same cable, or setting master and slave jumpers.
Agreed. This is one of the few times I'll promote the better technology as being good for everyone, regardless of what they use their system for. SATA is currently in two forms: SATA 1.5 GB/sec and SATAII 3.0 GB/sec. Be forewarned that current limitations means that your 3.0 GB/sec won't transfer data at that speed (yet), but is faster than both IDE and SATA 1.5. We are rapidly approaching the day when the full transfer rate will be reached though, and SATAII won't be 'obsolete' in 4 months like some current CPU's, so just go for SATA
__________________
--Jay
Creepy Lurker Guy
imsati is offline   Reply With Quote


Old 12-08-2007, 06:53 PM   #6 (permalink)
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Age: 29
Posts: 628
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by imsati View Post
Agreed. This is one of the few times I'll promote the better technology as being good for everyone, regardless of what they use their system for. SATA is currently in two forms: SATA 1.5 GB/sec and SATAII 3.0 GB/sec. Be forewarned that current limitations means that your 3.0 GB/sec won't transfer data at that speed (yet), but is faster than both IDE and SATA 1.5. We are rapidly approaching the day when the full transfer rate will be reached though, and SATAII won't be 'obsolete' in 4 months like some current CPU's, so just go for SATA
Thanks! That's good stuff to know.
JohnJSal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2007, 09:35 AM   #7 (permalink)
Silver Member
 
lanpartiercarter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Kingsley Michiigan
Age: 17
Posts: 139
Default

sata 2
__________________
celeron d 3.33ghz
ati radeon x1300pro
2gbs of 5300 at 667mhz
120 gb sata2 hardrive
old crt monitor
dual layer dvd burner
single layer x16 dvd burner
lanpartiercarter is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
WinXP boot up failure from SATA + IDE disk combo SSj4_Dthscythe Operating Systems 4 07-29-2006 12:39 PM
Can I boot from a slaved IDE with a primary Sata? asdfguy Computer Memory and Hard Drives 2 04-15-2006 10:36 PM
Another IDE vs. SATA Question... aramp1 Computer Memory and Hard Drives 4 04-28-2005 12:47 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:22 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.3.0 ©2009, Crawlability, Inc.