Anybody running an ATA/133 hard drive. - GoFuckYourself.com

AssFairy · 07-05-2003, 09:03 AM

Talk dirty to me and tell me just how blazing fast it is.

FiReC · 07-05-2003, 09:04 AM

raid is the only way to go.. even IDE raid is smoking fast.

AdultNex · 07-05-2003, 09:11 AM

SCSI all the way!

AssFairy · 07-05-2003, 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by FiReC
raid is the only way to go.. even IDE raid is smoking fast.

Raid would be nice but this is just for my home computer
what I really want to see is low latency when it comes to drive access

133 MB per second transfer rate gives me a hardon just thinking about it.

I can't wait to upgrade

AssFairy · 07-05-2003, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by AdultNex
SCSI all the way!

hehe SCSI is only about 10MB per second .... Snail comes to mind

chodadog · 07-05-2003, 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by AssFairy

hehe SCSI is only about 10MB per second .... Snail comes to mind

Errr, no. There are SCSI drives pushing over 320MB/s. Problem is they cost about 5 times as much as their IDE equivalents.

FiReC · 07-05-2003, 09:24 AM

I haven't ever noticed a significant difference in drive speed (going from ata 33 / ata 66 / ata 100 etc) without benchmarks until I used my first IDE raid system. That shit will melt the paint of your case.

AssFairy · 07-05-2003, 09:29 AM

Hmmmm now I'm starting to get a droop instead of a hardon

Maybe I'm going to have to go and start reading about hard drive specs again.
I thought the ATA drives were just one step from nirvana.

chodadog · 07-05-2003, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by AssFairy
Hmmmm now I'm starting to get a droop instead of a hardon
Maybe I'm going to have to go and start reading about hard drive specs again.
I thought the ATA drives were just one step from nirvana.

Just as IDE has, SCSI has also improved it's transfer rate over the years. You should stop looking at the specs for 500mb SCSI drives dude.

loverboy · 07-05-2003, 09:37 AM

nah, im using a SCSI hd and an External HD via fireport.

senseidru · 07-05-2003, 10:04 AM

A lot of people in this thread don't know the difference between mb and MB. n00bs.

-=HUNGRYMAN=- · 07-05-2003, 10:44 AM

Barracudas also come in ATA-150 now ...

I'm putting one in the Athlon XP 3000 machine I am building

SpaceAce · 07-05-2003, 10:47 AM

My motherboard has built-in IDE-RAID but I haven't taken advantage of it. Outside of benchmarking software, I have seen very little difference between ATA/66, /100 and /133 in practical use.

SpaceAce

chodadog · 07-05-2003, 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by senseidru
A lot of people in this thread don't know the difference between mb and MB. n00bs.

Actually, megabit is Mb, not mb. Seeing as you're being such an anally retentive prick and "correcting" people, i thought i'd return the favour! It's a given that when referring to hard drive capacity and transfer rates, that people are talking in Megabytes. Thanks for playing.

liquidmoe · 07-05-2003, 12:09 PM

SCSI is faster and more secure and if you want a headache then go for that IDE RAID which is completely unnecessary unless you are skimping on the cash.

Just hold out a little bit and get Serial ATA all the way if you want to avoid SCSI but still want fast access and alot of that goodness like daisy chaining that was previously only available with SCSI.

rowan · 07-05-2003, 12:29 PM

I haven't been too impressed with the higher numbers so far, but probably more because of the OS rather than the hardware...

ATA66 controller, ATA100 drive, 733 Celeron, FreeBSD: 60-65Mbytes/sec
ATA100 controller, ATA100 drive, 1.2GHz duron, Win98: 28-30Mbytes/sec

Not really a surprise that FreeBSD excels even with lower end hardware.

Windows can't even use a third of its burst capacity while FreeBSD is nipping at the maximum...

liquidmoe · 07-05-2003, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by rowan
I haven't been too impressed with the higher numbers so far, but probably more because of the OS rather than the hardware...

ATA66 controller, ATA100 drive, 733 Celeron, FreeBSD: 60-65Mbytes/sec
ATA100 controller, ATA100 drive, 1.2GHz duron, Win98: 28-30Mbytes/sec

Not really a surprise that FreeBSD excels even with lower end hardware. Windows can't even use a third of its burst capacity while FreeBSD is nipping at the maximum...

FreeBSD is the utlimate OS, well anyway in my opinion, if you run the new 5.0 hyperthreading on a dual xeon oh my my. As soon as it goes stable thats going on there hell yeah, I think I got hard thinking about it

senseidru · 07-05-2003, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by chodadog

Actually, megabit is Mb, not mb. Seeing as you're being such an anally retentive prick and "correcting" people, i thought i'd return the favour! It's a given that when referring to hard drive capacity and transfer rates, that people are talking in Megabytes. Thanks for playing.

Chodadog I used to love you man, what happened eh?

I never said megabit is mb so what is your problem?

I'll see you in #wankers on irc.fucktard.us

Arty · 07-05-2003, 04:33 PM

Based on my own experience with them, not much...

There is no big difference between ata100 and ata133...

But serial ata really rocks!!

vegasdude · 07-05-2003, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by FiReC
raid is the only way to go.. even IDE raid is smoking fast.

u better believe it... my new com takes 5.2 seconds from i push start to be fully loaded with win xp + programs...

okay my ram slots is complete used up and just got a brand new cpu/motherboard...

its so fast that i think my old 1900+ is slow!

07-05-2003, 09:03 AM	#1
AssFairy Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: AssTown Posts: 674	Anybody running an ATA/133 hard drive. Talk dirty to me and tell me just how blazing fast it is. __________________ I sale lube

07-05-2003, 09:04 AM	#2
FiReC Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Land o Nubiles Posts: 2,350	raid is the only way to go.. even IDE raid is smoking fast. __________________ www.nubilefilms.com \| www.nubiles.net \| www.anilos.com \| tubescript.nubiles.net \| icq4162727

07-05-2003, 09:24 AM	#7
FiReC Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Land o Nubiles Posts: 2,350	I haven't ever noticed a significant difference in drive speed (going from ata 33 / ata 66 / ata 100 etc) without benchmarks until I used my first IDE raid system. That shit will melt the paint of your case. __________________ www.nubilefilms.com \| www.nubiles.net \| www.anilos.com \| tubescript.nubiles.net \| icq4162727

07-05-2003, 09:29 AM	#8
AssFairy Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: AssTown Posts: 674	Hmmmm now I'm starting to get a droop instead of a hardon Maybe I'm going to have to go and start reading about hard drive specs again. I thought the ATA drives were just one step from nirvana. __________________ I sale lube

07-05-2003, 10:04 AM	#11
senseidru Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: UKStyle.UKFlow Posts: 1,767	A lot of people in this thread don't know the difference between mb and MB. n00bs. __________________

07-05-2003, 09:11 AM	#3
AdultNex Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Bostonnnn Posts: 8,985	SCSI all the way!

07-05-2003, 09:37 AM	#10
loverboy When it rains, it pours Industry Role: Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 20,609	nah, im using a SCSI hd and an External HD via fireport.

07-05-2003, 10:44 AM	#12
-=HUNGRYMAN=- Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Between your mamma's legs Posts: 4,753	Barracudas also come in ATA-150 now ... I'm putting one in the Athlon XP 3000 machine I am building __________________

07-05-2003, 10:47 AM	#13
SpaceAce Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Magrathea Posts: 6,493	My motherboard has built-in IDE-RAID but I haven't taken advantage of it. Outside of benchmarking software, I have seen very little difference between ATA/66, /100 and /133 in practical use. SpaceAce

07-05-2003, 12:09 PM	#15
liquidmoe Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: NY Posts: 4,994	SCSI is faster and more secure and if you want a headache then go for that IDE RAID which is completely unnecessary unless you are skimping on the cash. Just hold out a little bit and get Serial ATA all the way if you want to avoid SCSI but still want fast access and alot of that goodness like daisy chaining that was previously only available with SCSI.

07-05-2003, 12:29 PM	#16
rowan Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 17,393	I haven't been too impressed with the higher numbers so far, but probably more because of the OS rather than the hardware... ATA66 controller, ATA100 drive, 733 Celeron, FreeBSD: 60-65Mbytes/sec ATA100 controller, ATA100 drive, 1.2GHz duron, Win98: 28-30Mbytes/sec Not really a surprise that FreeBSD excels even with lower end hardware. Windows can't even use a third of its burst capacity while FreeBSD is nipping at the maximum...

07-05-2003, 04:33 PM	#19
Arty Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 880	Based on my own experience with them, not much... There is no big difference between ata100 and ata133... But serial ata really rocks!!