PDA

View Full Version : Serial ATA or Ultra ATA?



Arc Owner
January 2nd, 2006, 06:44 AM
I am in the process of building my own computer with ubuntu and...

1. should I go serial ATA or Ultra ATA? The motherboard I am buying supports both, so I have an option. Is the price and performance difference worth it to get serial ATA. I can usually find really good deals at my local stores on Ultra ata hard drives.

2. I will NOT be playing any games on my computer, and I am considering a Nvidia 6600GT or a Matrox video card. I just recently heard about Matrox, and I read that they are very good with 2D and non-gaming tasks, so can anybody give recommendations for a good non-gamers video card? Matrox officially supports linux and has drivers for it so I don't think compatability will be a problem.


Thanks,
Arc Owner

briancurtin
January 2nd, 2006, 06:57 AM
get a samuel jackson ATA, it'll get you drunk


sorry, just had to say that because of your picture

futz
January 2nd, 2006, 07:29 AM
1. should I go serial ATA or Ultra ATA? The motherboard I am buying supports both, so I have an option. Is the price and performance difference worth it to get serial ATA. I can usually find really good deals at my local stores on Ultra ata hard drives.
I would definitely recommend SATA, as PATA is being phased out slowly. Buy it so you can use it on future computers. But if you can get a hot deal on a pata drive, don't let that stop you. It's just that sata will fit all future computers for quite a while, but new mainboards are already coming with only one pata channel (2 devices - your optical drives) and multiple sata channels. Pata is going away.


2. I will NOT be playing any games on my computer, and I am considering a Nvidia 6600GT or a Matrox video card. I just recently heard about Matrox, and I read that they are very good with 2D and non-gaming tasks, so can anybody give recommendations for a good non-gamers video card? Matrox officially supports linux and has drivers for it so I don't think compatability will be a problem.
I haven't owned a matrox vid card since the early 90's :rolleyes: I guess they're ok, but they haven't really seemed to keep up much, ya know?

That 6600GT is a fine vid card. I have two. They're a fine lower-midrange gaming card, but they also do 2D perfectly well. Blazing fast, even. You really won't find any card on the market, even the cheapest ones, that can't do 2D just fine.

You could even buy a cheap $55 (insert your local price here) FX-5200 card if you wanna save money. They work great for linux. I have two of those as well. They won't make the big framerates for gaming, but for 2D you will not notice the difference for most things. And they usually have no fan, so they're quiet.

But do stick with nvidia chipsets over ati (for now) for linux.

mstlyevil
January 2nd, 2006, 07:37 AM
I have to agree with futz. SATA drives are just as cheap (and in some cases cheaper) than PATA. I bought my 250GB WD SATA II Hard Drive for $95. I paid $70 for my 40GB PATA drive 2 years ago. Since you are not playing games or doing 3D rendering, the Geforce 52200 is an excellent choice. If the MOBO you buy has PCI-E, then you will want to buy a Geforce 6200 or a 6600GT (I got my 6600GT for $119 at newegg.com).

poofyhairguy
January 2nd, 2006, 09:09 AM
The 6600 GT is more than fast enough to do fun compositing- it is a great Linux card. Get it if you want the fun eye candy in the near future. Its what I have.

prizrak
January 2nd, 2006, 10:50 AM
SATA I is actually slower than UATA (can't burst as high) but it does RAID if you wanna go that route. SATA II is actually the fastest for consumers WD drives I seen run at about 300MB/s. If you can go with SATA II I suggest that as HDD is always the bottleneck in performance.

sapo
January 2nd, 2006, 11:01 AM
As long as you stay away from ATI you should be fine :D

Arc Owner
January 2nd, 2006, 02:58 PM
thanks guys for all the replys, although just for the record I have PCI express.

I think I'll have to go with PATA now (and I can always upgrade later since I have the option on my motherboard), because locally, I can get a WD 300GB Ultra ATA hard drive for $70 after rebates. Thats an awesome deal and there are many others like it so maybe in a year when more SATA hard drives come out and there are more deals on them I'll upgrade.

I am not interested in RAID at the moment, although in the future I think it would be cool to buy 2 raptors and put them in a RAID setup.

I'll definitely go with Nvidia, and either a 6200 or 6600(GT).

Thanks guys for all the help:p !

erikpiper
January 2nd, 2006, 07:10 PM
One thing to consider- Hard drives are bottlenecks in performance. The faster they are, the faster you can load things, etc. Cheap hard drives are SLOW. (Some even 5400 RPM!) I would only by a 7000+ RPM drive myself, and with a big cache. Actually I would only buy a 10,000 RPM drive.


And a 6600 does composting PERFECTLEY.

mstlyevil
January 2nd, 2006, 08:12 PM
One thing to consider- Hard drives are bottlenecks in performance. The faster they are, the faster you can load things, etc. Cheap hard drives are SLOW. (Some even 5400 RPM!) I would only by a 7000+ RPM drive myself, and with a big cache. Actually I would only buy a 10,000 RPM drive.


And a 6600 does composting PERFECTLEY.

WD just released the new Raptor with 150GB capacity and on a SATA II interface. Looks like Raptor will be back on top for performance.

WildTangent
January 2nd, 2006, 08:20 PM
WD just released the new Raptor with 150GB capacity and on a SATA II interface. Looks like Raptor will be back on top for performance.
They also cost an arm and a leg. Here, a 74GB raptor costs $220, compared to $71 for a 7200 rpm 80GB hard drive. Not worth the investment if you ask me.

-Wild

mstlyevil
January 2nd, 2006, 08:22 PM
They also cost an arm and a leg. Here, a 74GB raptor costs $220, compared to $71 for a 7200 rpm 80GB hard drive. Not worth the investment if you ask me.

-Wild

I personally would not spend that kind of money on one myself. But some people want the latest and greatest no matter what the cost.

prizrak
January 2nd, 2006, 09:52 PM
Well if you want the latest and greatest I'd highly suggest a RAID 0 running 15K RPM SCSI drives. HDDs don't get faster than that ;)

erikpiper
January 3rd, 2006, 12:11 AM
They also cost an arm and a leg. Here, a 74GB raptor costs $220, compared to $71 for a 7200 rpm 80GB hard drive. Not worth the investment if you ask me.

-Wild



Yes, but the 34 Gig version is a lot cheaper! "only" $104. Still expensive..
Plus, by the time I get one, they will be normal, and cheap.

mstlyevil
January 3rd, 2006, 12:13 AM
Yes, but the 34 Gig version is a lot cheaper! "only" $104. Still expensive..
Plus, by the time I get one, they will be normal, and cheap.

You better read a few reviews on SATA IIs vs the old 36 gig SATA I Raptor. You might be surprised by the results of those reviews.

erikpiper
January 3rd, 2006, 12:27 AM
Its better than my 4200 rpm, no cashe, 40 gig drive...

Anyway I am not getting a new HD for at least 6 months...

mstlyevil
January 3rd, 2006, 12:33 AM
Its better than my 4200 rpm, no cashe, 40 gig drive...

Thats true but I got my SATA II 250 GB hard drive for less than a 100 bucks. You can get more for your money by buying SATA II vs a SATA I Raptor and get equal to better performance. The new SATA II Raptors are just hitting the market but they are still going to ridiculosly expensive and will have a maximum of 150 GB of storage capacity. SATA II drives offer both performance and value compared with a Raptor.

floyd27
January 3rd, 2006, 03:52 AM
Can you use a SATA2 HDD in a SATA 1 mobo? I mean i dont expect the full 300mb/sec but will it at leats work?

mstlyevil
January 3rd, 2006, 03:54 AM
Can you use a SATA2 HDD in a SATA 1 mobo? I mean i dont expect the full 300mb/sec but will it at leats work?

Yes they are backwards compatible. You just have to add a jumper to the SATA 150 pins.

SilentGreg
January 3rd, 2006, 05:10 AM
Also make sure your SATA chipset is supported in the kernel. Most are as long as you stick with Intel's, VIA's, SI's and nVidia's. Some of the other odd-ball SATA controllers that I have ran do not work with Linux. Somtimes even Windows if the drivers suck. ;)

Greg

floyd27
January 3rd, 2006, 05:41 PM
I use SATA 1 now... So its compatable. Except the HDD activity light doesnt work with the SATA HDd. Only the cdrom....

I was looking at SATA2 HDD's but I wasnt sure if i could use them in my SATA 1 mobo. Now that I know it will work its all gravy..

Oh.. What do you mean jumper on the SATA pins?? (The ones on the mobo like the cmos rest pins? Or the actual SATA connection? )

mstlyevil
January 3rd, 2006, 05:45 PM
I use SATA 1 now... So its compatable. Except the HDD activity light doesnt work with the SATA HDd. Only the cdrom....

I was looking at SATA2 HDD's but I wasnt sure if i could use them in my SATA 1 mobo. Now that I know it will work its all gravy..

Oh.. What do you mean jumper on the SATA pins?? (The ones on the mobo like the cmos rest pins? Or the actual SATA connection? )

SATA II hard drives have a set of pins on the back that if you need to use it on a SATA I MOBO you have to add a jumper. The jumper tells the HD to operate on 150 MB mode instead of 300 MB mode.

floyd27
January 3rd, 2006, 06:51 PM
gotcha....thanx