PDA

View Full Version : Serial ATA or FireWire 800


Drexster
10-14-2004, 02:06 AM
Well, i got myself a dual 2ghz G5 about a year ago and I'm about to run out of harddrive space for the 3rd time (i have 1 SATA 160 gb), i've backup up tons of files to DVD and frankly, i think it's time i get myself another drive. I'd like to get at least 200GB of space or more, my budget is approximately 500$ maximum, but if i can spend less i'd be more then happy to.

Is FireWire 800 faster then Serial ATA? i read somewhere that S-ata has no benefits yet until they make faster drives (7200 rpm) is this true? if so is it worth getting an external firewire drive? I do lots of video editing and rendering on a day to day basis so i need something that's speedy.
Another thing i'd like to consider is a raid. if i get a second sata drive does it have to be the same size as the first?

I'd like to hear peoples opinions on this, and any recommendations. Please no flaming, for these are the two interfaces i have chosen to use.

Thanks

imashination
10-14-2004, 02:14 AM
Is FireWire 800 faster then Serial ATA?
i read somewhere that S-ata has no benefits yet until they make faster drives (7200 rpm) is this true?
if i get a second sata drive does it have to be the same size as the first?


1) No, the firewire drive uses a standard ide harddrive, it cannot be faster
2) SATA has no amazing speed benefits now, but its a smaller cable and your machine has it, so why not.
3) RAID drives should be the same size, brand and model.

Drexster
10-14-2004, 03:15 AM
i don't understand, i thought firewire 800 was supposed to transfer data at speeds of 100mb/s compared to 50mb/s for firewire 400, and 60mb/s with usb2. how fast are the Serial ata connections?

Sieb
10-14-2004, 03:50 AM
i don't understand, i thought firewire 800 was supposed to transfer data at speeds of 100mb/s compared to 50mb/s for firewire 400, and 60mb/s with usb2. how fast are the Serial ata connections?

Yes, but Firewire800 is an INTERFACE not a DEVICE. An external drive caddy can be 800, but the drive inside is still sub 10k rpm PATA. Same applies if you use a PATA/SATA converter on a PATA drive, it will not go SATA speeds because its plugged into a SATA port, the drive interface is still PATA so the same transfer speed limitations apply.

Your best bargin is to just get another large SATA drive with a large cache.

As for the difference between Firewire and SATA: (scrapped from google forums)


"SATA is really just ATA over a serial interface. It's a Point-to-point
High-speed link. USB and Firewire are medium speed Serial Busses (64 devices
for Firewire, 128 for USB, both counts include the controller.), while they
can be used for storage, they also do amny other things.."

"Any high-end 7200rpm or 10k rpm disk can burst well above what standard
Firewire or USB 2.0 can handle (Burst rates are up around the 66MB/s point
for 10k RPM disks). Firewire isn't intended for that type of application
anyways, it's a replacement for external SCSI devices, not internal,
high-speed drives. It does work as a storage bus, but its not designed for
primary storage.

SATA doesn't give much headroom over ATA133, but it has some other
advantages, and you no longer have to worry about the Master/Slave problem
(2 drives per channel=shit performance).

SCSI is still a much better spec though. And it's got more than twice the
available bandwidth of SATA (320MB/s vs 150MB/s)"

Drexster
10-14-2004, 08:14 PM
ahh, thanks sieb...

Hmm, i wonder if Lacie's new 1TB hard drive is actually able to get firewire 800 speeds, cuse they claim they can.

but thanks for the info

Tarrbot
10-15-2004, 02:22 AM
I would say, "No". Mainly because LaCie isn't claiming to get all of the bandwidth from FireWire 800... just 50% more than other FireWire 800 drives (with an asterisk which says their first-gen drive is tested against it.)

1TB Drive info (http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10129)

http://www.lacie.com/imgstore/more/performance_bigger_extreme.jpg

Even their claim is still 10MB short of the throughput limit...which is sad really considering how "new" this spec is. It's already seeing limitations. :(

CGTalk Moderation
01-19-2006, 01:00 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.