1. This forum section is a read-only archive which contains old newsgroup posts. If you wish to post a query, please do so in one of our main forum sections (here). This way you will get a faster, better response from the members on Motherboard Point.

SATA III - is it going to immprove anything?

Discussion in 'Intel' started by Shaun, Mar 1, 2011.

  1. Shaun

    Shaun Guest

    I was reading specs on hard drive, specifically data transfer rates and it
    looks like they're much lower than even the SATA II maximum data transfer
    rates, so why did they come out with SATA III?

    .... or have I read something wrong?
    Shaun, Mar 1, 2011
    1. Advertisements

  2. Shaun

    Sjouke Burry Guest

    How else can they keep selling you stuff you dont need,
    because the old hardware is oke??

    By changing things of course. You need MULTY Terabyte storage you know......
    And you must really use 8core with USB15, must you not??
    Until we kill USB of course.
    Then you REALLY need the next generation gismo.

    Besides, who needs access to all those old backups, after we improve
    all that hardware?
    Sjouke Burry, Mar 1, 2011
    1. Advertisements

  3. Shaun

    Shaun Guest

    Ha Ha!

    Actually there not impoving things at all. I have had a new Seagate hard
    drive fail, it took 3 months. My parents had a seagate harddrive 1 TB die
    after 2 months of use and my cousin has had a recently bought harddrive die
    too, all in the last year. They used to be more reliable than this, now
    they just sell them cheap and obviously make them cheap. Personally I would
    prefer to spend a bit more for a hard drive if I knew the reliability was
    better. I'm not sure if WD is any better. The salesman at a local computer
    store said it was a crap shoot.

    Then there is memory that appearently works at much faster speeds,
    bullshit. The wait states on the memory in my Pentium 4, 800 Mhz FSB has
    cas and ras numbers around 3 clock cycles. Now they claim memory is working
    at 1300 to 1600 Mhz but the cas and ras numbers are 9 or 10, What a bunch of

    my rant,

    Shaun, Mar 1, 2011
  4. Shaun

    Jim Guest

    Jim, Mar 1, 2011
  5. Shaun

    Ken Guest

    Ken, Mar 1, 2011
  6. Shaun

    Shaun Guest

    Shaun, Mar 2, 2011
  7. Shaun

    Jim Guest

    CL is only half the equation. CAS/Frequency*1000 gets you the latency in
    nanoseconds. DDR-1600 CL8 is twice as fast as PC100 CL2.
    Wikipedia has a nice chart. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAS_latency
    Jim, Mar 2, 2011
  8. Shaun

    Lance Guest

    Shaun wrote the following on 2/28/2011 18:09:

    If I'm in the market for a hard drive, I usually try to purchase
    "Enterprise-class" or server drives. If you look in the spec sheet a
    MTBF will be specified. Consumer-type drives don't have MTBF listed.

    I've had very good luck purchasing drives this way - and they are not
    all that much more expensive.

    Lance, Mar 2, 2011
  9. Don't confuse sustained rate with burst rate, particularly from cache. As
    someone else noted Intel just announced SATA-III SSD drives. I may buy one, I
    have the ports and the system would benefit from having the OS and a few things
    on really fast media.
    Bill Davidsen, Mar 3, 2011
  10. Per Bill Davidsen:
    I rebuilt my system around an 80-gig SSD drive some weeks ago.

    Can't put a number on it, but the subjective improvement in
    speed/response is very noticeable.... sometimes seemingly almost
    back the old 486/character-based days.
    (PeteCresswell), Mar 3, 2011
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.