"UseNet" <Cal@obded.org> wrote in message
news:tKchi.491$eY.25@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net...
> My motherboard specs say it is sata-150. does that mean it cant use a
> sata-300 disk? whats the diff, other than the 150 integers.
>
> Cr
>
On Jun 29, 12:06 pm, "UseNet" <C...@obded.org> wrote:
> My motherboard specs say it is sata-150. does that mean it cant use a
> sata-300 disk? whats the diff, other than the 150 integers.
>
> Cr
Speed of the interface. You can use the 300 on a 150 interface.
The SATA-300 can theoretically transfer data twice as fast.
--
---------------------
DaveW
"UseNet" <Cal@obded.org> wrote in message
news:tKchi.491$eY.25@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net...
> My motherboard specs say it is sata-150. does that mean it cant use a
> sata-300 disk? whats the diff, other than the 150 integers.
>
> Cr
>
On Jun 29, 6:31 pm, "DaveW" <noth...@bot.org> wrote:
> The SATA-300 can theoretically transfer data twice as fast.
With emphasis on "theoretically", as most drives cannot even begin to
approach the speed of the 150 interface. Of course the maximum "burst"
speed may (or may not) benefit, but that is essentially limited to
data in the on-drive cache. Even many SSD disks have sustained
transfer rates below the SATA-150 limit.
Dean G. wrote:
> On Jun 29, 6:31 pm, "DaveW" <noth...@bot.org> wrote:
>> The SATA-300 can theoretically transfer data twice as fast.
>
> With emphasis on "theoretically", as most drives cannot even begin to
> approach the speed of the 150 interface. Of course the maximum "burst"
> speed may (or may not) benefit, but that is essentially limited to
> data in the on-drive cache. Even many SSD disks have sustained
> transfer rates below the SATA-150 limit.
>
> Dean G.
>
The fastest drives can't even sustain half that speed of a SATA150
interface. The drive cache is really most effective on writes much more
than read.
On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 16:04:04 -0700, "Dean G."
<dguttadauro@4ecp.com> wrote:
>On Jun 29, 6:31 pm, "DaveW" <noth...@bot.org> wrote:
>> The SATA-300 can theoretically transfer data twice as fast.
>
>With emphasis on "theoretically", as most drives cannot even begin to
>approach the speed of the 150 interface. Of course the maximum "burst"
>speed may (or may not) benefit, but that is essentially limited to
>data in the on-drive cache. Even many SSD disks have sustained
>transfer rates below the SATA-150 limit.
>
>Dean G.
The typical SSD runs in what is essentially ATA66 mode. The
crude low-end junk SSDs run somewhere between PIO mode and
ATA66. That means a range of max, peak throughput between
6-66MB/s.
With most versions of Windows, Enterprise Server 2003 for example, you will
still need to press F6 during setup and insert a floppy containing the SATA
controller driver. Another option is to slipstream these drivers.
Manny wrote:
> UseNet wrote:
>
>> My motherboard specs say it is sata-150. does that mean it cant use a
>> sata-300 disk? whats the diff, other than the 150 integers.
>
>
>
> There's a fair chance a SATA2 harddrive will not work on a SATA controller
> until it's jumpered properly.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/2ra47o
>
>
> With most versions of Windows, Enterprise Server 2003 for example, you will
> still need to press F6 during setup and insert a floppy containing the SATA
> controller driver. <snip>
Maybe. I haven't had to do that in a long time with either XP or Win2K.
"UseNet" <Cal@obded.org> wrote in message
news:tKchi.491$eY.25@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net...
> My motherboard specs say it is sata-150. does that mean it cant use a
> sata-300 disk? whats the diff, other than the 150 integers.
Think of the first one as a 2 lane motorway, but your drive only needs one
lane. the second one is a 4 lane motorway, but your drive still only needs
one lane!
spec is the maximum speed of the bus, most drives can transfer at 60-70.
sata-150 vs sata-300 
Linear Mode
