Multiple HD Question?

BlueWeasel · Post by **BlueWeasel** » Fri Dec 01, 2000 5:48 pm

I am about to do some HD benchmarking to find out for sure, but here is my situation:

- Abit BE6-II MB with HP Onboard ATA/66 Controller
- WD 20 gb ATA/66 HD
- WD 4 gb ATA/33 HD

Currently I have the 20gb HD on the ATA/66 controller as the primary master and it has run great for 11 months now.
I have the older 4gb HD currently on the ATA/66 as the primary slave connected to the 20gb.

I have heard multiple times it is better to have HD on seperate channels, since running a slave lowers performance. I am sure this would be the case for my setup too.

Since nothing is currently on the secondary port of the ATA/66 controller, then I would get better performance with each HD on as the master on both ports as compared to have the smaller HD as a slave to the larger HD.

Is this assumption correct?

[Edited by BlueWeasel on 12-01-2000 at 05:51 PM]

Splitfire · Post by **Splitfire** » Fri Dec 01, 2000 7:41 pm

No it is not correct, at least not exactly. Running a master/slave hard drive does not really affect performance that much (i.e. the difference is almost negligable). The only time you might see a difference is when you are copying large amounts of files from from one physical drive to the other. However, since you are not running anything on the secondary IDE controller, I would say run that small drive as a secondary master simply because there is a slight performance hit running the two together. But don't expect to see a huge difference.

Mike89 · Post by **Mike89** » Sun Dec 03, 2000 7:59 pm

I agree. I had that exact same question once.

WD 20.5 gig 7200 rpm
WD 13 gig 5400 rpm

I originally had these HDD's as master and slave on a 80-wire cable connected to the ATA/66 primary on my BE6-II.

Someone told me that the 5400 rpm would slow down the 7200 with that set up. He told me to hook them both as single master drives on ATA/66 primary and secondary.

I did that but have yet to see/notice any difference. All I notice is that I now have an extra cable in my case.

[Edited by Mike89 on 12-03-2000 at 08:01 PM]

BlueWeasel · Post by **BlueWeasel** » Sun Dec 03, 2000 9:23 pm

I did some benchmarking with HDTach and the results were interesting.

The performance of the 5400rpm HD while being a single drive on the second ATA/66 channel was only about 80-85% of the the performance I got with the 5400rpm HD when it was a slave with my DVD drive being the master on the the standard ATA/33 channel.

The highpoint BIOS configured the drive as DMA 2, and it was also running with DMA enabled when it was on the ATA/33 channel.

Overall, I am a little suprised about the results. I would have expected the performance at least the same or higher with the drive on the ATA/66 as compared to the ATA/33 channel.

Also, the results were identical when I had the 20gb ATA/66 as the master and the 4gb ATA/33 on one ATA/66 channel and when they were on both ATA/66 channels as single drives.

Either way, I went ahead and just left the smaller HD on the secondary ATA/66 channel since I am just using it as a backup and secondary storage for data - performance is not really an issue.. . . .

Frost · Post by **Frost** » Mon Dec 04, 2000 12:34 am

Hmm, thats kinda weird. I am stuck on a 5400rpm drive. It sucks. I am getting raid for/around christmas though!

Frost.

BlueWeasel · Post by **BlueWeasel** » Mon Dec 04, 2000 12:48 am

Frost:

I would not put much into my benchmarks. I have read several places that my onboard controller (Highpoint ATA/66, HP366) is not the best in the world, and that putting an IDE/33 HD on one of the ATA/66 channels may cause a decrease in performance for the IDE/33 HD.

However, I have been very satisfied with my WD 20.5gb ATA/66 hard driver and the performance of this drive on the HP controller.

LarryJoe · Post by **LarryJoe** » Mon Dec 04, 2000 4:26 pm

You are kind of over thinking it a bit. Having them on the same chain will slow the speed down to that of the slower device only when they are being accessed at the same time. However, since you have the scondary HP chain free, you may as well put the smaller HDD over there to avoid this, but really no big deal either way. Also, the HP controller uses one IRQ where the mobo controller uses 2 - one for each chain. So if you can disable one in the BIOS, go for it and save an IRQ.

I have the HP controller in my rig and am happy. I have my Primary HDD chained with a Zip on the HP controller and the performace is right up to snuff. I never use my Zip anyway.

LJ

[Edited by LarryJoe on 12-04-2000 at 04:28 PM]

RubberDuckie · Post by **RubberDuckie** » Tue Dec 05, 2000 10:37 am

It is not reccommended that you put a ATA33 on the HP ATA66 controler. I would Put the smaller drive on the ATA33 controler as IDE1 Master and the ATA66 on IDE3 Master. You can still set your BIOS to boot from the ATA66.
If you have ATA33 and ATA66 on the same channel they both run at the slower ATA33 speed. I have heard rumors that the HP controler dones not handle an ATA33 device very well.

LarryJoe · Post by **LarryJoe** » Tue Dec 05, 2000 1:14 pm

....

[Edited by LarryJoe on 12-05-2000 at 01:18 PM]

LarryJoe · Post by **LarryJoe** » Tue Dec 05, 2000 1:19 pm

Originally posted by RubberDuckie
If you have ATA33 and ATA66 on the same channel they both run at the slower ATA33 speed

This is simply not true.

LJ

RubberDuckie · Post by **RubberDuckie** » Tue Dec 05, 2000 5:13 pm

When connecting a non-ATA66 device to an ATA66 ribbon you destroy the 80 connection necessary to achieve ATA66. Therefore as soon as you connect an ATA33 device to ATA66 channel you bring it down to the ATA33 bandwith. Because we all know that 80pin IDE ribbon is REQUIRED for ATA66.

Not the best example of this specs but Im at work now.
Ill post the specifications from Western Digial later for ya:
http://server39.hypermart.net/mtoverclo ... ting.shtml

Quote from above link:
<I>"...because you can't have an ATA33 device on the same channel as an ATA66 device or else the port reverts back to the slower of the two protocols."</i>

[Edited by RubberDuckie on 12-05-2000 at 05:23 PM]

BlueWeasel · Post by **BlueWeasel** » Tue Dec 05, 2000 6:49 pm

Yeah, that what I was getting at first. I had heard that before, and that is why I have the ATA/33 drive as a single drive on my secondary ATA/66.

LarryJoe · Post by **LarryJoe** » Wed Dec 06, 2000 1:30 pm

I have a zip(hardly an ATA33 device) as the slave to my primary ATA66 HDD on the HP ATA66 controller and my HDD benches where an ATA66 should with HDTach. Wouldn't you think the Zip would mess up the 80-pin theory and slow down my HDD? It doesn't in my case.

LJ

Splitfire · Post by **Splitfire** » Wed Dec 06, 2000 1:36 pm

Duckie--
That is old information. If you connect an ATA/33 and an ATA/66 device via an ATA/66 cable to an ATA/66 controller, both devices WILL run at there repsective speeds. This is called independent device timing and has been supported by all chipsets since around HX or so.

LarryJoe · Post by **LarryJoe** » Thu Dec 07, 2000 5:52 am

Thank you. This myth has to be the biggest piece of misinformation that I see in threads. You would be surprised at how many threads there debating this at Anands right now. Drives me crazy seeing people go to the such extremes as putting only one device on each chain and stocking up with Promise cards to accomplish this.

LJ