SATA vs IDE???  | | |
September 17th, 2004, 08:10 AM
|
#1 (permalink)
| | Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 205
|
Hey everyone,
im in the middle of upgrading my PC and have changed my graphics card. But im on a budget so i was wondering whether i should spend around £70 on gettin an additional SATA 120GB HDD for my primary drive. What i want to know is if theres a big increase in speed when playing gamesthat make the price worthwile or would it be wiser to use the money on gettin a better grahics card??
THanks for any reply |
| |
September 17th, 2004, 08:18 AM
|
#2 (permalink)
| | Ultimate Member
Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Texas
Posts: 2,194
|
Just a quick reply before I head to bed but I think you'd be better off putting your money on a better graphics card rather than a SATA drive. |
| |
September 17th, 2004, 08:25 AM
|
#3 (permalink)
| | Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 28
|
sata has almost no affect on games, but if you want to know heres the break down
ata100 = 100mb/s (most drives)
ata133 = 133mb/s (Maxtor drives)
SATA = 150mb/s (will be going faster)
SCSI = 320mb/s (industrial drives, but the best) |
| |
September 17th, 2004, 09:52 AM
|
#4 (permalink)
| | Member
Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: UK
Posts: 430
| Better Graphics Card
SATA makes a bid difference if you are setting up RAID 0 or 1 or 0+1 but I wouldn't think so for a single drive that will be used for games.
Better off gettig a better graphics card |
| |
September 17th, 2004, 11:19 AM
|
#5 (permalink)
| | Ultimate Member
Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Augsburg, Germany
Posts: 5,586
|
What omega said is just the theoretical interface bandwidth. Between SATA and IDE difference, there is _no_ difference in the actual media throughput. Quite the opposite in fact - many SATA drives still use converter chips, which actually makes them slower than their parallel IDE siblings. |
| |
September 17th, 2004, 12:34 PM
|
#6 (permalink)
| | Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Somewhere n Arkansas
Posts: 775
|
I run a single raptor 360 and I can say that I sacrificed space for speed.Wish I had at least 80 gigs of drive because I game.But don't go sata unless your putting dual drives for a raid configuration,and thats gonna cost.I have never had a seagate but would cosider one.I plan on ugrading my to dual someday because I have a buddy has one set up and it is sweet to game on or anything else.Thats my believe.Stay with a 7200 drive 8mb |
| |
September 17th, 2004, 01:22 PM
|
#7 (permalink)
| | Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 870
|
Some numbers were listed earlier with a small b, as in bit. Should be B, as in byte. By and large you've got good advice. Moving to SATA won't affect your gaming experience. It would make a small difference, negligible really, in data throughput. |
| |
September 17th, 2004, 02:36 PM
|
#8 (permalink)
| | Ultimate Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,338
|
Actually, as Peter M mentions, it could have a negative effect on performance.... |
| |
September 17th, 2004, 04:02 PM
|
#9 (permalink)
| | I'm silently judging you
Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Lincoln City, OR
Posts: 5,377
|
Better graphics card for gaming.........and you could have an 8GB/s for your hard drive but it wouldn't make any difference unless you have a drive that could read or burst faster than 133MB/s or 150MB/s, ATA or SATA respectively.
What video card do you have now? How about HD space and spindle speed? |
| |
September 18th, 2004, 04:22 PM
|
#10 (permalink)
| | Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 205
|
hey
right now ive got a GeForce FX5200 but im going to upgrde it to a ATI Radeon 9800 Pro. I think my HDD is running at 7200rpm. Its a 120GB Western Digital. |
| | | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | | | | |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | | | | Most Active Discussions | | | | | Recent Discussions  | | | | | |