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
(text/plain)