Quote:
Originally Posted by Arkryal
SATA has a 2x greater bit density. That means it (potentially) reads twice as many bits per rotation, even while moving at 2/3 the rotational speed. .
|
All SCSI drives made at the same time as a SATA II drive have the same bit density.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arkryal
This assumes bits are arranged contiguously..
|
What a stupid statement.... of course they are contiguous.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arkryal
So a quality SATA drive should theoretically see about a 13% increase in speeds.
|
Incorrect, the reason its faster is NCQ (don't know what it means, look it up)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arkryal
SCSI however has othe driver controls allowing for on-the-fly defragmentation, error checking etc. SATA can do these things, but typically with greater system overhead.
|
This isnt software, this is hardware....
To be honest, I would only go with SATA II because of the money, and the fact you do not need a 3rd party controller. Othere than this, SCSI is always faster because everything about SCSI is hardware driven. It is a tried and true technology that has rarely been beaten or discredited. The other fact about SCSI drives is they are Enterprise Drives (What does this mean..... It means they have been through more QA then the average drive and are built with the intention to be beaten on at full load 24/7)