IDE v SATA
Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee
IDE v SATA
Hi
Is a SATA Hard drive louder than an IDE Hard drive?
Ta
Is a SATA Hard drive louder than an IDE Hard drive?
Ta
Short answer : most probably not.
Long answer :
If you're talking about otherwise identical models, no. After all, the difference is only in the interface electronics and not in the moving parts.
However, it is possible that parts for the drives might come from different sources (check the Samsung threads, for example). Again, that may not make any difference, or can make it louder. Or softer.
SATA does give you the advantage of thinner cables that don't get in the way of the airflow, therefore giving you lower temps. Or the ability to turn the fan down a notch.
Why do you ask?
Long answer :
If you're talking about otherwise identical models, no. After all, the difference is only in the interface electronics and not in the moving parts.
However, it is possible that parts for the drives might come from different sources (check the Samsung threads, for example). Again, that may not make any difference, or can make it louder. Or softer.
SATA does give you the advantage of thinner cables that don't get in the way of the airflow, therefore giving you lower temps. Or the ability to turn the fan down a notch.
Why do you ask?
The only case I know where SATA is loder is in the Seagate 7200,7 series. And thats not because the drive is louder but because of the AAM settings.
The SATA version is set to performance and the ATA version is set for low performance (but better acustics). So the reason for the SATA drive to be louder (and faster) in this case is simply because of AAM and has nothing to do with SATA itself (note that you can not change the AAM modes on Seagate 7200,7).
The SATA version is set to performance and the ATA version is set for low performance (but better acustics). So the reason for the SATA drive to be louder (and faster) in this case is simply because of AAM and has nothing to do with SATA itself (note that you can not change the AAM modes on Seagate 7200,7).
Mats,
This is true but all the drive makers can and must set these parameters in the drives at the design stage. These are the same parameters that we can set in SOME drives by using AAM/AMSET etc. It looks like Seagate decided on "Performance" specs for the SATA and "Quiet" specs for the PATA.
I guess the confusion is his saying "AAM" when it is really a manufacturing spec. that is not user adjustable.
From what I read both you and tjoff wrote that "you" (the end user) cannot change the AAM settings on the 7200.7 drive.tjoff wrote:(note that you can not change the AAM modes on Seagate 7200,7).
This is true but all the drive makers can and must set these parameters in the drives at the design stage. These are the same parameters that we can set in SOME drives by using AAM/AMSET etc. It looks like Seagate decided on "Performance" specs for the SATA and "Quiet" specs for the PATA.
I guess the confusion is his saying "AAM" when it is really a manufacturing spec. that is not user adjustable.
Confusion...
What I always thought:
Neither the SATA nor the PATA version of the 7200.7 have AAM enabled, and the end user can't change it like you can on many other HDs.
The reason why Seagate won't use it is because they're not allowed, it's something about a patent. Can't remember, but I've seen it in many threads.
__________
Suddently (if you're right), a reason for buying a PATA model is that it got AAM enabled. I've never heard about it, only the opposite.
What I always thought:
Neither the SATA nor the PATA version of the 7200.7 have AAM enabled, and the end user can't change it like you can on many other HDs.
The reason why Seagate won't use it is because they're not allowed, it's something about a patent. Can't remember, but I've seen it in many threads.
__________
Suddently (if you're right), a reason for buying a PATA model is that it got AAM enabled. I've never heard about it, only the opposite.
Hej to Mats and the rest of the board!
I'm new here but I have a 80GB SATA and 200GB PATA, both 7200.7's. I've subjectively compared these two with my 80GB PATA barracuda V, and these are my opinions on this matter:
1. All three drives emits about the same level of noise when in idle. That said, turned upside-down the sea-shield of the barracuda V muffels the sound a little bit, but overall I didn't notice any difference. I must also point out that my rig yet is a bit on the noisy side, but I'm working on that. So please bear in mind that I had more background noise then most members of this forum.
2. With the barracuda V (80GB) and 7200.7 (200GB) PATA I have to say that noise levels again are very alike in read/write operations. If pressed to point out a winner, I'd actually say that the 7200.7 has by a hair even less protruding "clicking" noise amongst the two.
3. The 7200.7 (80GB) SATA's read/write noises are far higher then on the other two. Actually, I disabled for a while AAM on the barracuda V, and this got me to a close match between the two 80 GB disks.
Nor the PATA or SATA 7200.7 disks can enable or disable AAM by the way, this option is simply "not supported".
My personal conclusion (based on my two disks):
The SATA 7200.7 have AAM disabled - or is audibly similar to my barracuda V with AAM disabled.
The PATA 7200.7 have AAM enabled - or is audibly similar to my barracuda V with AAM enabled.
However, I have not compared the perfomance of the two 7200.7 disks to find out if this actually IS like enabling/disabling AAM, because I understand that platter density of the 200GB disk is different from the 80GB and the results would thus not be comparable.
Hope this helps
I'm new here but I have a 80GB SATA and 200GB PATA, both 7200.7's. I've subjectively compared these two with my 80GB PATA barracuda V, and these are my opinions on this matter:
1. All three drives emits about the same level of noise when in idle. That said, turned upside-down the sea-shield of the barracuda V muffels the sound a little bit, but overall I didn't notice any difference. I must also point out that my rig yet is a bit on the noisy side, but I'm working on that. So please bear in mind that I had more background noise then most members of this forum.
2. With the barracuda V (80GB) and 7200.7 (200GB) PATA I have to say that noise levels again are very alike in read/write operations. If pressed to point out a winner, I'd actually say that the 7200.7 has by a hair even less protruding "clicking" noise amongst the two.
3. The 7200.7 (80GB) SATA's read/write noises are far higher then on the other two. Actually, I disabled for a while AAM on the barracuda V, and this got me to a close match between the two 80 GB disks.
Nor the PATA or SATA 7200.7 disks can enable or disable AAM by the way, this option is simply "not supported".
My personal conclusion (based on my two disks):
The SATA 7200.7 have AAM disabled - or is audibly similar to my barracuda V with AAM disabled.
The PATA 7200.7 have AAM enabled - or is audibly similar to my barracuda V with AAM enabled.
However, I have not compared the perfomance of the two 7200.7 disks to find out if this actually IS like enabling/disabling AAM, because I understand that platter density of the 200GB disk is different from the 80GB and the results would thus not be comparable.
Hope this helps
My only fleeting Seagate experience was with a single PATA 160G 7200.7. Idle was very quiet, comparable or perhaps a bit quieter than my 120G (gasp) Maxtor DiamondMax +9 drives.
Seeks were another matter. The PATA 160G 7200.7 seemed to be locked in performance mode and was substantialy louder than two RAID 0 120G DM9+ Maxtors set to quiet mode via the Maxtor AMSET utility.
Seeks were another matter. The PATA 160G 7200.7 seemed to be locked in performance mode and was substantialy louder than two RAID 0 120G DM9+ Maxtors set to quiet mode via the Maxtor AMSET utility.
Cthulhu, välkommen till SPCR!
I didn't know that there was a difference between the two versions. I'm really looking forward to see what the new 7200.8 is like. Something tells me that Seagate must have realized that the 7200.7 is to loud for being a modern Barracuda, and yes, 20 bels for the single platter 7200.8 is better than 25 bels for the single platter 7200.7.
I didn't know that there was a difference between the two versions. I'm really looking forward to see what the new 7200.8 is like. Something tells me that Seagate must have realized that the 7200.7 is to loud for being a modern Barracuda, and yes, 20 bels for the single platter 7200.8 is better than 25 bels for the single platter 7200.7.
-
- SPCR Reviewer
- Posts: 8636
- Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2002 6:33 am
- Location: Sunny SoCal
Guys, thanks a bunch!! (Tack så mycket)Ralf Hutter wrote:uhh, yeah....what he ^ said!Mats wrote:Cthulhu, välkommen till SPCR!
Slightly off topic of course but it usually is a good idea to be polite...
BTW I finally ordered the Antec 3700BQE today and it's like the final piece of the puzzle, I've slowly changed to quiet components for years and now it will hopefully pay off... keeping my fingers crossed