Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

what is pata?

Last response: in Storage
Share
June 27, 2006 3:16:31 PM

subject speaks for itself

More about : pata

June 27, 2006 3:44:59 PM

pata is basically IDE drives.

It stands for parallel ata. Newer systems are using sata (serial ata) drives. Yes.. it's just that simple.
June 27, 2006 4:00:04 PM

thanks
that was simple
i thought it was somethin totally different
lol
Related resources
June 27, 2006 9:01:11 PM

PATA is Paralell ATA basically slower than the newer variant SATA Serial ATA. older hard drives have this type of connection and will work at -correct me if im wrong- 33/100/133mts whilst sata works at 1500/3000mbs (found in newer hard drives and some newer optical drives ).
hope this helps! :D 
June 27, 2006 9:04:26 PM

Quote:
PATA is Paralell ATA basically slower than the newer variant SATA Serial ATA. older hard drives have this type of connection and will work at -correct me if im wrong- 33/100/133mts whilst sata works at 1500/3000mbs (found in newer hard drives and some newer optical drives ).
hope this helps! :D 


Since we're being pedantic. PATA is 33/66/100/133 MB/s. As well there are older versions of PATA which (this is really really testing my memory) that go as low as 4MB/s. I could be wrong on the 4MB/s... sooooo old. Back in the good ol days of DOS.
June 28, 2006 1:57:00 PM

Quote:
PATA is Paralell ATA basically slower than the newer variant SATA Serial ATA. older hard drives have this type of connection and will work at -correct me if im wrong- 33/100/133mts whilst sata works at 1500/3000mbs (found in newer hard drives and some newer optical drives ).
hope this helps! :D 


ctually, it is the interface speed... hdd speed are noe even able to fully saturate ata100 interface speed. but sata improve on feature and modern sata hdd are faster than older pata one due to better mechanic and improved electronics and firmware.

in both case, it is still an ide hdd and an ide controller.. only the interface is different
June 28, 2006 2:20:04 PM

Exactly right. You'll notice that PATA (IDE) drives have a specification for ATA (which stands for Advanced Technology Attachment) 133, but few manufacturers even use it. Most IDE drives are just ATA100. Why? Because there is no reasonable performance gain from the extra 33MB/s data path speed. It's like having this car that has a top speed of 55mph and driving on a road with a speed limit of 100mph or 133mph. Who cares, you can only go 55mph anyway.

The same thing is true of SATA1 or SATA2. On a good day the average SATA1 or 2 drive will push out a max of around 55MB/s. Raptors do it faster because they spin at 10k rpm and can deliver data faster, but not all that much faster. This is the reason that many servers still stick with SCSI drives. They run at an average of 15k rpm and have ridiculously expensive yet efficient controllers that combine for much faster data transfer than IDE or SATA.

Bottom line, SATA is not much more expensive (if at all) than IDE. If your motherbaord has SATA or you own a SATA controller, go with SATA. For the smaller cables if nothing else; but having no jumpers and being hot swappable are nice perks. SCSI is usually only used in servers because it's expensive. A good SCSI controller can run you close to or even over $1000 and the drives are usually around $300 for the good ones; and that's only for 100-250GB drives. SCSI is also really loud, 15k rpms is about twice as loud as a new SATA drive.

There's my ramble for the morning. I hope you loved it.
June 28, 2006 2:47:53 PM

From what I've read/heard the SATA drives have come pretty close in performance to the average SCSI drive. Yes the more expensive ones are faster still, but the cost to performance ratio, especially lately, has made SATA a more palatable option. As you said a good SCSI controller will cost around $1k and the drives will set one back a good $300, while most current motherboards are coming with SATA already, and the drives are uber cheap ~$100 for 250GB (ish). I've also used a 10,000 rpm SCSI drive at work and then used my raptor at home and I'd have to say I've seen no benefits from the SCSI drive that make it worth it. However, that could easily be attributed to system age.

Regarding SATA vs. PATA I went from IDE hard drives to SATA drives and noticed a significant difference. After that I added my raptor and noticed an even greater difference, overall I'd say SATA has become well worth it especially with price drops over the last year or so.
June 28, 2006 6:30:58 PM

Quote:
From what I've read/heard the SATA drives have come pretty close in performance to the average SCSI drive. Yes the more expensive ones are faster still, but the cost to performance ratio, especially lately, has made SATA a more palatable option. As you said a good SCSI controller will cost around $1k and the drives will set one back a good $300, while most current motherboards are coming with SATA already, and the drives are uber cheap ~$100 for 250GB (ish). I've also used a 10,000 rpm SCSI drive at work and then used my raptor at home and I'd have to say I've seen no benefits from the SCSI drive that make it worth it. However, that could easily be attributed to system age.

Regarding SATA vs. PATA I went from IDE hard drives to SATA drives and noticed a significant difference. After that I added my raptor and noticed an even greater difference, overall I'd say SATA has become well worth it especially with price drops over the last year or so.



HDD output may be close to SCSI, but SCSI controller are still more efficient than IDE ones. so SCSI will be faster by getting efficient transfer and putting less load on the CPU. But for home desktop, IDE is quite sufficient
!