Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Serial and IDE Harddrives...

Last response: in Storage
Share
October 31, 2003 4:26:00 PM

I've got a few harddrive questions, but this is all hypothetical as I'm thinking of upgrading. Right now, I've got a 30GB ATA133 7200RPM going in on my primary IDE. I realize that sharing that primary channel with another harddrive could lead to speed issues as they compete for bandwith.

My question is ...could I put a new hardrive going into my motherboards serial channel? Can I have two seperate HDs, one IDE, one serial? If so, would this avoid the bottleneck of sharing two drives on IDE slot?

Finally, what exactly are the speed gains of going serial - I do not intend to RAID or anything like that. I'm under the impression that serial is faster than an ata133 ide channel, but even if that is the case, HDs can't take full advantage of ata133, right? So, are there any real speed benefits to having a single, non RAID drive on serial?

If I do go one serial and one IDE, how does the whole "master" and "slave" thing work, since there would no slaving going on? Which drive would I put my boot OS on? In any case, should my boot OS always go on my faster drive? Should programs like games go on the faster drive, and put static data like mp3s and documents on the slower drive?

I realize htat's a lot to answer, but thanks.

Joe

Windows XP
Asus Nforce 2 Deluxe mainboard
Athlon 2600+
blah blah what else matters?

More about : serial ide harddrives

October 31, 2003 9:02:19 PM

using a SerialATA and an ATA hard drive should work fine, ive got an 80gb SATA, and 20gb ATA100 myself, they should both be masters as they are on different channels, Serial ATA is faster because it uses a faster interface then PATA (ATA33/66/100/133) the bottleneck you encounter with 2 HD's on one IDE channel is just a bottelneck of the IDE channel, when using 1 ATA133 and 1 Serial ATA like you want to do, they will each have their own channel, and the only potential bottle neck you will face is between the Southbridge and the processor(most/all HD's communicate with the processor through the south bridge) based on your mother board, and how many other things are sharing the southbridge (usually the stuff in your PCI/USB ports and most network interface devices). So unless you have a ton of PCI and USB devices, specificly bandwidth intensive devices, you shouldent have much of a bottleneck to worry about, not to mention, unless you do a RAID array or are copying from one HD to the other, they probably wouldent be using bandwidth at the same time. You should deffinitly put your OS and programs on the Serial ATA drive, will give you much faster boots and program loading, put everything else on the ATA133
November 3, 2003 11:43:32 AM

Basically cyberstatic is right: there should be no problems mixing SATA and PATA in a system.

There is no master/slave issue in SATA as there is only one device per channel (PATA gives you 2 devices/channel, hence the neccessity to give both drives a different name. They could have chosen A/B or X/Y or 1/2 or first/second, they choose master/slave). There is also no master/slave issue if you connect both drives to different IDE channels.

You also have no bandwidth problem if you connect 2 PATA drives to different IDE channels (all motherboards that I know of have 2 parallel IDE channels, but I believe that on some mobo's one IDE channel is lost when you enable Sata).

SATA drives are generally high-end drives. SATA also has more potential, it suports features only found on SCSI systems so far. Those potentionals are not implemented in the current SATA drives.

It is a misconception that SATA performs better than PATA. A SATA drive will perform almost identical to its PATA twin.
!