Ultra ATAs

Post by **Massive Quasars** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 5:13 am

Should I expect issues using an Ultra ATA 100 HD on a mobo that supports only Ultra ATA 33 or 66. Any jumper changes required?

And regarding USB 2.0 HD enclosures, I know the USB 2.0 standard is backwards compatible with 1.1, but will the newer USB 2.0 enclosures switch to 1.1 mode when they're connected to an older mobo that only supports that version? Should I expect any issues besides a noticeable slow-down, will the HD complain? On that note, what does the USB 1.1 throughput rate translate to in DVD x-times speeds (e.g. 2x, 6x, 12x, etc.)?

Thanks.

Post by **Massive Quasars** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 8:46 am

Well I have one of my answers, at full speed, USB 1.1 works out to a little over DVD 1x speed. Horribly crippled. I don't even think a DVD 4x drive would run down to 1x speed on the inner portion of a disc.

Post by **AmIdYfReAk** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 11:42 am

The ATA100 drive will slow down to a slower speed if the mobo dosent support it, i have a ATA133 drive on a mobo that only supports ATA66 and its working fine, not at full speed, but it works

As for the USB speeds, you should be able to pull off 1-2X on Usb1.1, its contstant rate is a little low, but usually it uses a Burst to get a little higher transferrates.

and yes, the Enclosures will switch down to usb 1.0 if they need to, or 1.1, or 2.0

What are you going to be using this for? just as a backup drive?

Post by **Massive Quasars** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 6:32 pm

A unique backup situation yeah, straight forward enough though, just checking my options.

What burst rate data are you looking at Amidy? USB 1.1 tops out at 12Mbps, probably doesn't even sustatin that, works out to 1.5MB/s (DVD 1x = 1.385MB/s roughly).

Post by **AmIdYfReAk** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 8:07 pm

with my 2.0 Enclosure, when i have it running at Usb 1.1 it will burst to around 2.8M/sec .

during long sustained transfers it will drop from 4Mb/sec down to ~2 megs and hold it.

if you where closer, i would send you my enclosure to test it out.

Post by **Massive Quasars** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 8:40 pm

I have my own USB 2.0 enclosure and drive, amidy, though I don't have access to the system I plan to use it on just yet.

Strange you bring that up though, you sure the results aren't skewed? Perhaps the new USB standard and drive are ideally positioned to maximize the throughput of the older USB 1.1 standard. The numbers you're giving me would work out to 2-3x DVD speed roughly. Might be equivalent or marginally better than a 4x DVD drive averaging performance across the disc.

Post by **AmIdYfReAk** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 11:46 pm

i beleve that is what i got when i tested it last..

i am not sure what else to tell you at all man, sorry.. that is what i remember.

Post by **Massive Quasars** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 12:09 am

no prob, you answered most of my questions

thanks

Post by **AmIdYfReAk** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 12:34 am

hey man, no problem,

gimmie a shout if you run into an issue or something when you get around to using this "unique backup" solution.

Post by **Massive Quasars** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 12:43 am

Took it upon myself to bypass this issue entirely, and strictly take the internal route.

From that arises another question though, what kind of life expectancy can I expect from the new multi-hundred gig Ultra-ATA drives. Given regular use, should I expect them to last 5 years? 10 years?

Thanks.

Post by **AmIdYfReAk** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:55 am

That is a good question, somthing that i couldent answer.. but none the less its a good one.

i have a few 200's here that are over 4 years old and are running wtrong ( 98% health according to S.M.A.R.T ) and they are all WD's, i have a MAxtor 250ggi SATA2 drive that is just a hair over 1 year old and she is 100% health.

but keep in mind, i have gotten a few DOA's in my day, as well as a few drives Die on me.

But i would say that in the ballpark of 4-5 years you should be good, 10 would be pushing it.

Torr might have some more input on this,

edit: before you get the wrong idea about MAxtor, i have a 30 gig that is over 7 years old now and it still works and is ~low 80% high 70% health acording to SMART. i just went on a WD buying binge, thats all

Post by **Massive Quasars** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 3:52 am

I think it would be used less frequently than an average PC (not quite hours daily), but it would be moved around more often. The tech doesn't exist today to do this reasonably (expense and time-wise), but when the drive begins to show it's age I'll be sure to image the HD (all hundreds of gigs of it, and dump each partial image to the largest optical media discs availabe at the time, HD DVD or Blue-ray likely).

Post by **AmIdYfReAk** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 3:59 am

indeed, just check on SMART and it will tell you the general Health of the drive, and listen for clicks and etc when the drive is starting up..

also, i would like to add.. a drive running/being used all of the time isent bad for it, Moving/jaring it around in the transportation process is really bad for it..

so keep that in mind

Post by **Massive Quasars** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 4:06 am

aye, I know Amidy. I'm worried that'll do more damage than the regular operation of the drive, but mind you that it will be mostly reading and not writing (nor caching). Not sure what you'll get out of that but I throw it out there anyway.

oh and when I say it'll be moved around, I mean nearly as often as "relatively frequently" would suggest.