Sata2 Vs USB 3 for HDD storage

abully

Distinguished
Sep 7, 2010
573
1
19,065
Hello

I am looking to add storage to my old rig for storing media.

My primary drive is Kingston Digital HyperX Predator 240 GB PCIe SSD which i recently added and moved the old 1 GB seagate HDD for storage. Now the HDD is nearing full and i need to add storage.

My 7 year old mobo has Sata2 ports as well as couple of USB 3 outlets. I looking to add 3-4 TB HDD either as an internal HDD, like the old seagate, via sata2 or i can add external HDD via the USB3. I would ideally like to have the storage available at all times and not as a plug-in as and when desired.

Which would be the recommended way to go? My choices are

SEAGATE BARRACUDA 3 TB SATA Internal HDD for USD 100 connected via Sata2.
TOSHIBA 3TB CANVIO BASICS External HDD for USD 110 connected via USB3.

Thanks for suggestions in advance!!!
 
Solution
Yes, you're correct about that Gigabyte MB being equipped with only SATA II data connectors, yet having provision for USB 3.0 connectivity. It was one of the earliest types of MBs (actually became available at the end of 2009) that was so configured.

By all means continue your research, but whatever final approach you arrive at I strongly suggest that it includes provision for at least an auxiliary external (presumably USB 3.0) backup device as previously indicated. Furthermore, if you do decide on the latter approach, I would recommend your purchasing your own USB external enclosure (or "docking station") together with a HDD of your choice - as opposed to purchasing a commercial "one-piece" USBEHD.
Using an internal drive is more of a "permanent" solution in my eyes. And if you're just using it for storage the difference in speeds won't make much of a difference.

And the one thing I hate on portable drives (which is necessary I must admit) is that they go into a low power state when they idle and take a short amount of time to come back to life when you need it for something. I'm just impatient and I want my media NOW. The internal HDD will be better in that regard.

Plus, if you have the portable plugged in all the time and by some chance you knock the drive onto the ground while it's still running - poof, there goes all your data.
 

abully

Distinguished
Sep 7, 2010
573
1
19,065


Thanks for the reply.

As said earlier, this drive will be exclusive for all my media (pics, videos, music). I wont be doing much writing except when copying files into it and I wont access the data regularly. The latency delay shouldn't be an issue here.

If I do go for the external HDD option, it will be external on paper as I'll secure it inside the case and run the USB to the back of the rig. This way it'll be cooled by the rig's big fans as well as remain dust free.

I guess for now the main criterion for choice would be the difference in speed of the drives. How much will the USB 3 be faster than Sata 2? On paper the difference is 2 gb/s; thats 250 mbytes/s.

Unless there is a deep rooted technical reason to go internal, the USB 3 external HDD looks like the better choice on paper. But I like your philosophy of "permanent solution" giving it a more stable solution. The below also adds some weight to your recommendation.
https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/internal-vs-external-hdd-sata-3-vs-usb-3.2381732/

Let me wait for a week for some more insight before deciding on it.
 
FWIW, by & large I'm in agreement with ThatVietGuy.

Not that this is a crucial difference but data transfer speed of an internally-connected drive (even when connected to a SATA II data connector) will most likely be even faster than when compared with a USB 3.0 external drive. That has been our experience time & time again. But if there is a diifference "speedwise", it should be insignificant.

(BTW, it seems odd to me that (apparently) your system has only SATA II connections available, yet contains USB 3.0 capability. It's rare that a motherboard would be so equipped in my expereince- I can't recall coming upon such a configuration. I suppose you could have "used up" all the other SATA III data connectors for other drives/devices or I suppose you could have installed a PCI USB 3.0 controller card. Just wondering.)

Now absolute (more or less!) security would demand an external source for the secondary HDD you plan to install. Especially since you've indicated that the data storage on that disk involve photos, videos, other audio-visual material and the like. Presumably material that would be difficult, if not impossible, to replace if lost.

So conceivably you might consider a dual approach to this storage/backup situation. Internally connect the secondary HDD to be utilized on a day-to-day basis. And also have at hand a USB external enclosure + of course, a HDD with sufficient disk-space capacity to receive the cloned contents of the internally-connected HDD from time to time, depending upon whatever changes occur on that secondary drive. And in addition, consider cloning (onto that same external HDD using a separate partition) the contents of your 240 GB boot drive from time to time.

Yes, there would be an extra cost involved here, but it's not terribly onerous I would think. And you would have the peace-of-mind that comes with such a configuration. We've been doing pretty much the same for more than 20 years now and never regretted it for a moment.

 
Yes, you're correct about that Gigabyte MB being equipped with only SATA II data connectors, yet having provision for USB 3.0 connectivity. It was one of the earliest types of MBs (actually became available at the end of 2009) that was so configured.

By all means continue your research, but whatever final approach you arrive at I strongly suggest that it includes provision for at least an auxiliary external (presumably USB 3.0) backup device as previously indicated. Furthermore, if you do decide on the latter approach, I would recommend your purchasing your own USB external enclosure (or "docking station") together with a HDD of your choice - as opposed to purchasing a commercial "one-piece" USBEHD.
 
Solution