SATA and SATA II

[davebee123]

Can anyone help me understand the difference in these two designs. I am looking at purchasing a mobo ASUS P5LD2 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813131538 and it has SATAII slots. Will a regular SATA peripherals work or do they have to be SATAII?
Is one significantly better than the other?
I am probably making this more complicated than need be but I have searched endlessly for a solid comparison and can't find one. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
davebee123

 

[idiotec]

SATA drives will work, SATAII is backwards compatible. There is really no performance boost going with SATAII as current hd's don't even max out the bandwidth of SATA.

 

[davebee123]

Thanks for the reply, so let me ask another question concerning
DDR and DDR2 I have read that the performance boost for DDR2 is not much of a step above DDR. So my question is will DDR work in a DDR2 Mem slot? Anyone know? Thanks
davebee123

 

[idiotec]

So my question is will DDR work in a DDR2 Mem slot?

Nope, that one is not backwards compatible. DDR2 is 240-pin and DDR is 184-pin, so it does not work.

 

[davebee123]

Thanks again! Hey I noticed U have the newer style ASUS mobo. I am thinking of getting one. What is your experience with it and what are the perks U see? I see the SATA II, DDR2, Raid 0/1/Matrix Raid. Can U tell me what matrix raid is and how it works, do I understand correctly that it gives you features of raid 0 and mirroring capabilities too? Thanks again I have learned alot
davebee123

 

[idiotec]

I've been really happy with my mobo. The main reason I went for the one I did is because of the feature to change the mulitplier.

I am not sure what matrix raid is, but what you described is can be called RAID 0+1, maybe its the same thing.

 

[davebee123]

I did some research last night and if U R interested the way I understand it is that Matrix Raid gives U raid 0 and 1 capabilities utilizing 2 Hds instead of 4. The first halves of the drives are used as a Raid 0 and the second halves are used for a raid 1. Just thought it might interest ya. Here's the link if ya wanna check it out, pretty interesting I thought. Thanks again http://techreport.com/reviews/2005q1/matrix-raid/index.x?pg=1

davebee123

 

[idiotec]

Yeah, very interesting, hadn't heard of that one yet. Sounds pretty cool.

 

[Apokalipse]

I did some research last night and if U R interested the way I understand it is that Matrix Raid gives U raid 0 and 1 capabilities utilizing 2 Hds instead of 4. The first halves of the drives are used as a Raid 0 and the second halves are used for a raid 1. Just thought it might interest ya. Here's the link if ya wanna check it out, pretty interesting I thought. Thanks again http://techreport.com/reviews/2005q1/matrix-raid/index.x?pg=1

davebee123

I don't like that matrix raid array. since the drives have to now write to themselves twice (to both halves of the drive) it eliminates any speed gain by the raid 0. also, by having both drives backup half the data each, it is still not redundant. if one drive fails, half the data goes out with one, and the other half becomes unusable.

 

[idiotec]

I don't like that matrix raid array. since the drives have to now write to themselves twice (to both halves of the drive) it eliminates any speed gain by the raid 0. also, by having both drives backup half the data each, it is still not redundant. if one drive fails, half the data goes out with one, and the other half becomes unusable.

This is not completely true if you read the article.

One, the benchmarks show comparible performance to standard RAID 0, not that it adds significant performance anyways, but still, comparable.

Two, you end up with two physical drives. One RAID 0 drive and one RAID 1 drive. The data on the RAID 1 array is redundant and has the same benifits of normal RAID 1. The data on the RAID 0 array is not redundant and poses the same risk of a normal RAID 0 array.