Bill Earl wrote: > > George Toft wrote: > >> >> Personally, I think SATA sux. >> >> > > I'm about to come to the same conclusion. We've tried several > different SATA drives and interfaces on five recently purchased > computers from various manufacturers, and the I/O performance has been > abysmal. This is with no adapters involved, just straight SATA drives > into SATA interfaces. Comparing ATA drives with SATA drives, the > performance on the systems has been disturbingly different, on the > order of 3 to 4 times faster using ATA drives with the same specs as > the SATA drives. > > I've looked in the BIOS for the magic "Go faster" setting and haven't > found anything yet. Two of these were name brand (one a Dell, one an > HP) new systems, so I would think they would ship with at least decent > default settings. It's not just a Linux thing either. The SATA drives > were slower in Windows too. > > It's been better so far to install an old ATA interface card in a PCI > slot with ATA drives compared to an onboard SATA interface and SATA > drives, and that just shouldn't be. > > Bill > > --------------------------------------------------- So is the only advantage just size? --------------------------------------------------- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss