I tried searching through the forums for Sata, but there's like 100+ threads, I looked through a few, but didn't find the answers I was looking for. I know SATA is faster than IDE, I've seen MOBO's that say their SATA port is 150mb/s, and others that say it's 1.5gb/s.. IF the HD I am getting has a 300MB/s data transfer rate? Will I benefit from the 1.5?? Also what is SATA II, and what are RAID1/0 functions?? I guess I'm just old school, don't much about anything not IDE.
Well, RAID 0 is if you have 2 HDD's and you set it up on the RAID then it will act as 1 HDD..so if 1 HDD fails the other 1 will have all the information on it...Same thing for RAID 1-5 just if you have more HDDS
Oh okay, well that helps, but I'm really confused about this SATA thing.. but on another MOBO SO why do some processors boast 1.5Gbps dtr, and some boast 150Mbs dtr, while others boast the "newer" SATA II at 300Mbps dtr??? Is this all a marketing thing?? Just went and read my message and I realized 1.5Gbps is actually SLOWER than 300MBps... So it's an avertising Scheme??
300mbp is like 3gbs which is the new SATAII or Sata2 connections, the old typ is 150mbs or 1.5gbs which is know as SATA or Sata1.
No. That RAID Info is wrong. Sorry to sound vulgar, but it's important. RAID 0 is a stripe, the disk drives have synchronous data like one drive, but only one copy. If one drive fails, ALL the data is lost. However, it's good for capacity and speed. RAID 1 is a mirror, good for contingency. Two drives only give you the capacity of one, but upped speed and greater reliability - if a drive goes, all the data is on the other. RAIDs 3,5,0+1,1+0 are all combinations and/or variations upon these, but usually only available with dedicated cards rather than standard RAID controllers. With S-ATA 1 (the original version) max speed is 150MB/s (megabytes) or 1200Mb/s (megabits). In later incarnations, S-ATA II is 300MB/s (megabytes) or 2400Mb/s (megabits). However, to confuse things more it can be used at speeds of up to 3000Mb/s (375MB/s). IDE is limited to a maximum of 133MB/s with ATA133 and 100MB/s with ATA100, being 1066Mb/s and 800 respectively, far short of the 3000 SATA 2 offers. HOWEVER, with normal drives the most you can expect per drive is about 500Mb/s, so unless you're RAIDing 4 or more drives together, SATA one is adequate. Raptor drives will do about 700Mb/s but even so you need three to over-saturate the older SATA interface. One other boon SATA has is NCQ, meaning that the drives sort their list of jobs out separate from any software, optimising read times, lowering latency and upping speed. Generally only SATA Drives have these, and not all of them, be sure to look out for it, it makes a difference.
The performance increase won't be great, but S-ATA drives are often more modern designs than their PATA (IDE) counterparts. Plus of course, as I mentioned they use NCQ. In some cases, they're also cheaper, and if you're interested in RAID arrays, whether for reliability or for performance, the majorty of motherboards (even my OEM-specific board) allow for integrated S-ATA RAID, without the need to buy an expensive controller card.
It's starting to make alot of sense now. The HD I've getting the WD Caviar says it has a 300MBps dtr, so that's good, I had another question the board I'm getting also supports JBOD. I've never heard of that. http://www.asus.com/products4.aspx?modelmenu=2&model=755&l1=3&l2=15&l3=0
Wow, My eyes hurt. I just read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID and wow. It all makes sense now. Well as good of sense as it can make unless I actually use it.. I can see the uses for Alot of the RAID functions, expecially RAID 50 (RAID 5+0), I like the idea of the Mirror drive, doubling transfer rates, but cutting disc space in half. The RAID 50 example looks like it takes a minumum of 6 HD's... I just can't imagine having that much going on... I guess RAID isn't for me. Oh yeah, it talks about JBOD to, in case anyone else didn't know what it was it's basically reverse partitioning. Instead of taking one Big HD, and making it into 2 or more smaller ones, it takes 2 or more small HD's and makes one big one.
JBOD actually just means "Just a bunch of drives". Seriously. Basically it means it supports using the drives on their own, rather than using any RAID configuration. What you've listed is RAID 0. Reverse partitioning is exactly what RAID 0 does, one big drive from numerous smaller ones. four 250GB drives in RAID 0 will make one 1000GB drive, running near 4x the speed. Four 250GB drives in RAID 1 will make one 250GB running about 2x the speed, but 4x the data reliability.
@ sammoris....Thats wrong..Raid 0 is a mirror and that when you set up Raid and the data is "mirrored" on both disks...so if 1 fails the other 1 has all the data...My dad works at IBM and works with communications....I might not of said that right but i know that for 1 thing that if 1 drive fails the other is a backup
@tocool4u actually, sammorris is CORRECT and YOU are wrong~ sorry man...RAID 1 is the "mirrored" one, RAID 0 is the "striped" one...while it IS possible to recover data if one of the drives fail on RAID 0, it will more than likely be corrupt or damaged~ when you say, if one drive fails the other is the backup, that is using RAID 1 ("mirrored effect"), not RAID 0 as you previously assumed... it's all good that your dad works at IBM, however, with the information presented HERE, sammorris is 100% correct and in this case, you are 100% wrong~ docTY~
This is what i said "I might not of said that right but i know that for 1 thing that if 1 drive fails the other is a backup" so i messed up the RAID o and Raid 1........And i knew the mirrored 1 was the backup one so that proves i meant RAID 1 OK........HAPPY So assuming that Sammoris is right sorry..............
@tocool4u nobody is attacking you here, just mearly stating and correcting some misinformation that i saw, your exact quote was this you blatantly stated that Raid 0 is a mirror, that is the ONLY portion of your post that i was pointing out is incorrect~ don't get so worked up over a simply correction, we all make mistakes, but for the BENEFIT of all the others reading this thread and have questions regarding SATA, some CORRECT/ACCURATE information needs to be addressed... i have nothing against you, simple correction, that is all...no need to trip... docTY~
I know that but in my last post i said that since i said mirrored i meant RAID 1 the second post was a mistake
it's all good, simple mistake, like i said, we ALL make mistakes...let it slide...and continue on... no harm, no foul. docTY~
I am kinda interested in this stuff...But my dad says that if you have 3 drives on RAID 0 ..And how it is striped.....That it has an archive Bit...So all the Information will stored in the Archive Bit then could be sent to the drives P.S i am not starting an argument..Just want to know this stuff LOL...I am learning alot for my AGE
It is useful to talk about Mirroring (for safety); or Striping (for performance); or Striping with Parity (for both :^) The actual RAID numbers can be confusing and difficult to remember... But it is important to understand the concepts. Regards
Me too, I'm 17, and 5 years ago I knew barely anything about computers, other than how to use them, to a degree. When I was 12 someone managed to uninstall the CD-ROM driver on a junior school computer. No one knew how to fix it at the time, now it's probably one of the easiest things to fix in the world! I'm not digging at you at all mate, just correcting you so you know more!
