|
|
ATA/66 vs ATA/100
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Status:
Offline
|
|
Is there really that big of a difference between ATA/66 and ATA/100?
I'm asking you this question because I have finally saved enough money to buy a Powerbook and the only thing that's keeping me back is the speed of a hard drive. I believe I'm going to go with the TiBook 1GHz model because I don't think paying $1000 (I'm downgrading the hard drive to 40 GB and the SuperDrive to a Combo Drive) more for a faster bus, 2", aluminum, FireWire 800, Bluetooth built-in, and DDR333 SDRAM is justifyable. Mostly due to the fact that I won't be taking my TiBook everywhere I go except around the house where it isn't very prone to getting scratched. I also think Bluetooth will be useless to me. Same goes for Firewire 800. And when near my huge Trinitron monitor I will just hook it up to the Powerbook for maximum screen real estate. The only thing that I'm not quite sure about is hard drive speed. So is the speed between ATA/66 and ATA/100 really noticeable?
Also, if you think I'm making a huge mistake here and that I should wait for the 15" AlBook to come out (IF it is coming out, that is), then please tell me your input on this. I think it would be very possible for me to save enough money to buy a 17" model, I just don't think it's justifyable and that I could use the $1000 on other things.
I have also looked at the benchmarks that compare the TiBook 1GHz vs. TiBook 800 MHz and the difference is 2 or less seconds.. HMM. I just might go for the 800 MHz version and save a few hundred dollars more while I'm at it...
By the way, I'm a graphic designer and I will mostly be doing Photoshop work on this Mac. Not quite my first Mac, but more like my first laptop. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Canada
Status:
Offline
|
|
There is a difference, but it's not very big. For example, when copying a 2 GB file, it might take 20 seconds less, but there's really not much of a difference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status:
Offline
|
|
pretty much it just means that the disk can peak at 66MB/sec or 100MB/sec, the ammount of times that a disk actualy peaks its data transfer is few and far between, 30-40MB/sec seems to be the average throughput.
|
1Ghz Powerbook
40gb/1x512mb/combo/T68i
FireRAID 1 Host Independant Hotswap RAID 1 (80gb)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Status:
Offline
|
|
Can the 15" GHz PBG4 support ATA-100 hard disk drive?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: 33-37-22.350N / 111-54-37.920W
Status:
Offline
|
|
the typical speed of an internal drive on a PB is 30 MBS.... that is 33MBS slower than the ATA66 bus... mind you there are "burst" speeds that can come close to that, but no usually and as such it's like upping the RAM to DDR on the G4, it's more cosmetic than anything else...
|
Mac Pro 3.0, ATI 5770 1GB VRAM, 10GB, 2xVelociraptor boot RAID, 4.5TB RAID0 storage, 30" & 20" Apple displays.
2 x Macbook Pro's 17" 3.06 4 GB RAM, 256GB Solid State drives
iMac 17" Core Duo 1GB RAM, & 2 iPhones 8GB, and a Nano in a pear tree!
Apple user since 1981
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Can the 15" GHz PBG4 support ATA-100 hard disk drive?
the drive should work. It should run at ATA-66 speed.
Another thing to notice is that most HDs don't burst over 66 mbps. For instance, my IBM 60GXP burst at 68.8 mbps. That's burst speed, meaning it only is running that fast for a few seconds at a time. The very fastest that it sequentially reads is 40 mbps, and that's only for the first 10-15 GB of the 60 GB disk. The average sequential read speed is 30 mbps. So, I am not at all worried about putting a SINGLE disk on ATA66 instead of ATA100.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Status:
Offline
|
|
Sounds good.. Now talk me out of buying this TiBook and tell me why i should wait for the 15" AlBook to come out
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: 33-37-22.350N / 111-54-37.920W
Status:
Offline
|
|
Keeping in mind that I own a Tibook...
Pro's of Ti:
1. Cult following
2. Cost
3. Styling (all ports on back and covered)
4. Screen resolution for Ai rumored to be lower
5. many bugs worked out of it as it's a 4th gen machine
Con's of Ti
1. Ti case is fragile
2. It's last years news
3. It's a bit (and I mean bit) slower
Keeping in mind the deals on Ti's you can get... unless your ego requires the latest and greatest hardware.... get the Ti
|
Mac Pro 3.0, ATI 5770 1GB VRAM, 10GB, 2xVelociraptor boot RAID, 4.5TB RAID0 storage, 30" & 20" Apple displays.
2 x Macbook Pro's 17" 3.06 4 GB RAM, 256GB Solid State drives
iMac 17" Core Duo 1GB RAM, & 2 iPhones 8GB, and a Nano in a pear tree!
Apple user since 1981
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
I now this really has nothing to do with this topic or maybe it does....
BUT....I went to the Houston Apple store today to test out a 1GHZ Tibook. I currently have a 600 ibook. To tell you the truth I wasn't blown away speed wise like I was hoping for. I really want the higher resolution and screen size so thats why I'm look for the Tibook. But I was also thinking that this machine was much much faster than my 600 G3 i book. Didn't really feel like.....Maybe I'm not taxing it enough???
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: 33-37-22.350N / 111-54-37.920W
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Cincojoe:
I now this really has nothing to do with this topic or maybe it does....
BUT....I went to the Houston Apple store today to test out a 1GHZ Tibook. I currently have a 600 ibook. To tell you the truth I wasn't blown away speed wise like I was hoping for. I really want the higher resolution and screen size so thats why I'm look for the Tibook. But I was also thinking that this machine was much much faster than my 600 G3 i book. Didn't really feel like.....Maybe I'm not taxing it enough???
Did you try to encode an mpeg2 in Cleaner 6, or edit a movie in FCP3?
Cause I sure can tell a difference between a G3 and my G4 PB in that relm.
|
Mac Pro 3.0, ATI 5770 1GB VRAM, 10GB, 2xVelociraptor boot RAID, 4.5TB RAID0 storage, 30" & 20" Apple displays.
2 x Macbook Pro's 17" 3.06 4 GB RAM, 256GB Solid State drives
iMac 17" Core Duo 1GB RAM, & 2 iPhones 8GB, and a Nano in a pear tree!
Apple user since 1981
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
no, I didn't try any thing like that. I'm actually very new to macs. I bought this ibook because I wanted a laptop to travel with and heard good things from a friend. I have had it for about a year now and I'm already eager for something faster...
I don't think i want to the 17", I think that would be too big. So I went to try out the 15" Tibook and I just thought I would have noticed the power difference from my ibook.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Status:
Offline
|
|
Aesthetically-wise were you blown away?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
lol, yes I was....I have to admit the Tibook looks much better than this ice book does.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Status:
Offline
|
|
Seems like I'm going to go with the 800MHz Powerbook after reading the benchmarks supplied in my newest Macworld issue -- the 1GHz Powerbook beat the 800MHz one by ONE second in Photoshop 7
Sound-wise which generation of Powerbooks is the quietest? I hope the 800MHz generation doesn't sound like a blow dryer..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Funny you should mention the blow dryer...
That was one of the issues I was checking out as well when I went to the Apple store tonight. I turned on everything that Tibook had, Photoshop, itunes, imove, etc...I couldn't hear the fan running at all. I even picked it up and I listen for it. Never heard it...
Where is this review you read? do they have it on their site?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Status:
Offline
|
|
Can't find the benchmark on their site but I'll take a picture of the mag with my cam and upload it..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
There is no substantive difference. The differential between ATA/66 and ATA/100 is theoretical, especially for laptops. Both the TiBook and the MonsterBook use 4200 RPM hard drives, hence, the maximum transfer rate for both machines will be about 20 MBps. Thus, the difference is epiphenomenal. The difference, however, between a 133 MHz bus and a 166 MHz bus might be a bit more substantive.
|
God is just a statistic...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: 33-37-22.350N / 111-54-37.920W
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Riemann Zeta:
There is no substantive difference. The differential between ATA/66 and ATA/100 is theoretical, especially for laptops. Both the TiBook and the MonsterBook use 4200 RPM hard drives, hence, the maximum transfer rate for both machines will be about 20 MBps. Thus, the difference is epiphenomenal. The difference, however, between a 133 MHz bus and a 166 MHz bus might be a bit more substantive.
I agree with that, except I think the TiBooks' 4200RPM can do upto 30MBS... Its a high density drive..
|
Mac Pro 3.0, ATI 5770 1GB VRAM, 10GB, 2xVelociraptor boot RAID, 4.5TB RAID0 storage, 30" & 20" Apple displays.
2 x Macbook Pro's 17" 3.06 4 GB RAM, 256GB Solid State drives
iMac 17" Core Duo 1GB RAM, & 2 iPhones 8GB, and a Nano in a pear tree!
Apple user since 1981
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Status:
Offline
|
|
Lets consider my case, I got my PB G4 with a default ATA-66 60GB 4200 rpm HDD.
What would be the performance I gain by replacing the original one to an ATA-100 60GB 5400 rpm hard disk in terms of:
- General operations
- Photoshop works
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
The default drive in the current PBs, if it is the Fujitsu drive, is better than most 5400rpms out there. Do a forum search.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Let it not be ignored that an ATA/66 bus can only address up to 120GB at a time. If you're planning on using BIG drives later on, the ATA/100 might save you some headache later on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Can you have a HD larger than 120GB in a laptop? Do they make one?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Dec 2002
Status:
Offline
|
|
Can you have a HD larger than 120GB in a laptop? Do they make one?
Technically, yes, it's possible, but no, you can't get one yet. However, if you really need that kind of storage, I'd go with the biggest HDD you can find for the laptop (which for Apple ones will be about 60 gig, if I'm not mistaken) and buy an external 7200rpm FireWire drive. Maxtor now has them up to 250gig and they're pretty affordable considering...
http://www.maxtor.com/en/products/ex...5000/index.htm
So you could daisy-chain 4 of them to get a terabyte of space. If you need more thanthat, check back in 5 years for sizes up to..oh..let's say.... 3-10 TB?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: 33-37-22.350N / 111-54-37.920W
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by GoldenHammer:
Lets consider my case, I got my PB G4 with a default ATA-66 60GB 4200 rpm HDD.
What would be the performance I gain by replacing the original one to an ATA-100 60GB 5400 rpm hard disk in terms of:
- General operations
- Photoshop works
Thanks.
And ATA 100 drive will act as an ATA66 drive on a computer with an ATA66 interface.. so it's a waste of money
and like someone else said, the Fujitsu 60 giger in the PBTi 1.0Ghz is every bit as fast as 5400RPM drives out there... I am very please with it, and its dead silent.
Also, I used it for a while to edit a movie with FCP3 which recommends fast drives inorder not to get missed frames etc... and I had no problems. Mind you, I still bought an external LaCie drive 120Gig because it's still a bit faster and easier to work with dedicated media drive.
|
Mac Pro 3.0, ATI 5770 1GB VRAM, 10GB, 2xVelociraptor boot RAID, 4.5TB RAID0 storage, 30" & 20" Apple displays.
2 x Macbook Pro's 17" 3.06 4 GB RAM, 256GB Solid State drives
iMac 17" Core Duo 1GB RAM, & 2 iPhones 8GB, and a Nano in a pear tree!
Apple user since 1981
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Status:
Offline
|
|
I guess paying $450 more for the 1GHz version doesn't sound like such a bad idea..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: 33-37-22.350N / 111-54-37.920W
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by idyll:
I guess paying $450 more for the 1GHz version doesn't sound like such a bad idea..
It really isn't because the Mac (lets face it) is a but underpowered these days compared to Peecee.... and there will come a time (like when I took to DV editing my home movies) that you'll want as much speed as you can have. the TiSuperDrive is also a great deal now a days... I paid $3000 for mine and some paid $3200 for their 800mhz just 4 months ago... so go out and get it damn it!
|
Mac Pro 3.0, ATI 5770 1GB VRAM, 10GB, 2xVelociraptor boot RAID, 4.5TB RAID0 storage, 30" & 20" Apple displays.
2 x Macbook Pro's 17" 3.06 4 GB RAM, 256GB Solid State drives
iMac 17" Core Duo 1GB RAM, & 2 iPhones 8GB, and a Nano in a pear tree!
Apple user since 1981
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Status:
Offline
|
|
The data from the disk is accessed at 30 Mbps as other said. The ATA66-ATA100 difference show only if it accesses recent data from the drive cache. If it is large, say 2 MB, than you might notice the difference in everyday tasks, but not when copying large files. I would not pay much attention to that, rather I would keep an eye on having 2 MB cach in the HDD (not only 512 kbyte).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Status:
Offline
|
|
just wondering..
what would be faster -
a 667MHz Powerbook with 1GB of ram
or
a 800MHz Powerbook with 512MB of ram?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by idyll:
just wondering..
what would be faster -
a 667MHz Powerbook with 1GB of ram
or
a 800MHz Powerbook with 512MB of ram?
Depends on what you do. For the average user, the second machine will be faster.
But, if you work with a lot of large files, and you use OS X, you're gonna want to upgrade that second machine to a gig of RAM. Besides, it's cheap (i.e., $150 for a gigabyte).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by John123:
Depends on what you do. For the average user, the second machine will be faster.
But, if you work with a lot of large files, and you use OS X, you're gonna want to upgrade that second machine to a gig of RAM. Besides, it's cheap (i.e., $150 for a gigabyte).
Ok, good. I am going to be working with large Photoshop files.. then the first machine with 1GB of ram would be faster than the second with 512MB of ram, right?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Status:
Offline
|
|
The thing is that the latter 800MHz Powerbook with 1GB of ram would cost me somewhere around $2300 whereas the 667MHz Powerbook with 1GB of ram would cost me $1950 -- thus I'd have money left over for an iPod or something. The question Im asking is --IS a 667MHz TiBook with 1GB of ram faster than a 800MHz TiBook with 512MB of ram in apps like Photoshop, iTunes, etc. ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Misanthrope:
Let it not be ignored that an ATA/66 bus can only address up to 120GB at a time. If you're planning on using BIG drives later on, the ATA/100 might save you some headache later on.
ATA100 and ATA66 can't address drives bigger than 137GB. It's ATA133 that supports them. The speed "difference" makes none since laptop drives aren't that fast anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Admin Emeritus
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status:
Offline
|
|
Not quite.
The 137GB limitation has to do with the LBA (logical bus addressing), which is actually currently independent of the ATA revision. There are plenty of ATA66 and ATA100 buses out there with 48 bit LBA (which supports >137GB drives). ATA133 isn't a ratified standard yet (not that that has stopped Maxtor from shipping drives), although it is going to be the first ATA revision to require 48 bit LBA.
Either way, the difference between ATA33, 66, and 100 is negligible in a notebook, because notebook drives are only now approaching the 33MBps threshold, never mind 66MBps (even the fastest desktop ATA drives are around 45MBps). It is true that a faster bus can burst from the drive cache at full bus speed, but that basically helps speed when writing small files (even then, negligibly), and does little for read speed.
Rotational speed and areal density will have far more to do with speed than the bus. Higher areal density=higher throughput. Higher rotational speed=lower seek times. Higher density+higher rotational speed=a fast drive!
IBM is supposed to release 7200RPM notebook drives soon. Since I also assume that it will also increase areal density, so it's likely to be an awesome drive.
tooki
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Here
Status:
Offline
|
|
(
Last edited by Daniel Bayer; Jan 22, 2003 at 02:50 PM.
)
|
"I'll take a extra layer of ram on that
gigaflop sandwich mister"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Status:
Offline
|
|
Someone answer my last question please!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by tooki:
Not quite.
The 137GB limitation has to do with the LBA (logical bus addressing), which is actually currently independent of the ATA revision. There are plenty of ATA66 and ATA100 buses out there with 48 bit LBA (which supports >137GB drives). ATA133 isn't a ratified standard yet (not that that has stopped Maxtor from shipping drives), although it is going to be the first ATA revision to require 48 bit LBA.
Either way, the difference between ATA33, 66, and 100 is negligible in a notebook, because notebook drives are only now approaching the 33MBps threshold, never mind 66MBps (even the fastest desktop ATA drives are around 45MBps). It is true that a faster bus can burst from the drive cache at full bus speed, but that basically helps speed when writing small files (even then, negligibly), and does little for read speed.
Rotational speed and areal density will have far more to do with speed than the bus. Higher areal density=higher throughput. Higher rotational speed=lower seek times. Higher density+higher rotational speed=a fast drive!
IBM is supposed to release 7200RPM notebook drives soon. Since I also assume that it will also increase areal density, so it's likely to be an awesome drive.
tooki
Wait wait wait, so can the ATA/66/100 busses that are in PB's these days address data beyond 137GB? What about past PB's?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by idyll:
The thing is that the latter 800MHz Powerbook with 1GB of ram would cost me somewhere around $2300 whereas the 667MHz Powerbook with 1GB of ram would cost me $1950 -- thus I'd have money left over for an iPod or something. The question Im asking is --IS a 667MHz TiBook with 1GB of ram faster than a 800MHz TiBook with 512MB of ram in apps like Photoshop, iTunes, etc. ?
It depends on how bad you want the iPod. The performance gain/loss is marginal.
Happy?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
I've heard a lot of talk about a 15" Aluminum PowerBook. Are these just rumors? When do you think s product like this would actually come out?
(
Last edited by ebisix; Jul 19, 2003 at 01:41 AM.
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Status:
Offline
|
|
Let me phrase it another way . Performance-wise, the 667 DVI is better than the 12" AlBook, correct? Since the 12" AlBook is missing the 1MB cache and all..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: London, UK
Status:
Offline
|
|
Not necessarily. There have been a few people piping in with some XBench results (though how closely these reflect real usage is up for discussion) which show that in several respects the 12" 867 is comparable to the 15.2" 867.
The main area that the 12" seemed to lose out was in 2D graphics. If you can wait a while to see how the comparisons progress with some real-world figures then I think you'd be doing yourself a favour.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|