Serial ATA vs ATA 133

  Wellpastit 20:27 25 Mar 2004
Locked

I'm checking out new motherboards etc, and will use the newer Serial ATA Hard Drives if they are suitable.
I know they are faster than the ATA 133, but I have just read they are more suitable for storage.
Does this mean that a ATA 133 Hard Drive should still be used for the primary partition.
And is it harder is it to format and partition the Serial ATA hard drives.
I use Power Quest Drive Image, and Partition Magic?

  ade.h 21:19 25 Mar 2004

S-ATA is probably not worth it, at least not yet. 133mbps versus 150mbps - not much in it really, and I have read that S-ATA doesn't really achieve the full 150 here in the real world, just as 133 doesn't often give 100%, so don't feel like you're missing out. You may want to consider S-ATA if you plan to use two or more disks, perhaps in a RAID arrangement. click here is your first stop for more info. click here is aslo worth a read.

  ade.h 21:20 25 Mar 2004

aslo?! I mean also...

  Wellpastit 11:07 26 Mar 2004

I copy Video to Hard Drive and wanted the fastest write times. But using ATA 100 seems to cope, so I'll just update to 133 on this new rebuild. Checked out the web addresses and added to Favourites - Thanks

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

AMD Radeon Adrenalin release date, new features, compatible graphics cards

8 brilliant character artists speaking at Pictoplasma 2018

iMac Pro release date, UK price & specs

Football : comment regarder la Ligue 1 en direct ?