[Infernus]

I just recently purchased a new internal IDE 200GB ATA100 hard disk online but the company sent me the wrong thing. They sent me an external 200GB USB 2.0 hard drive.

So i was thinking whether or not i should keep the one they sent me (it would probably be easier for me to install cos i dont know much about installing internal IDE devices) or send it back.

Is there any disadvantages of having a usb 2.0 HDD over an ata 100 HDD? e.g. transfer speeds, etc and would it work the same way as an internal one? Should i keep it or send it back?

(btw i ordered a western digital...the usb one is by lacie)

 

[JohnWill]

Well, since inside that case is a standard IDE drive, you have the best of both worlds. If you're using this as storage, the external is quite convenient. If you plan on installing Windows or applications on it, it needs to be an internal drive. Open the case and take out the drive in that case.

 

[Infernus]

hmm i dont think i can open it and use it as ide (i dont think it would have an ide connector)

if i was just running games/listening to music off it would it run generally similar to an internal one?

thanks

 

[khoock37]

To have a rough idea of what you are going thru, I suggest you go to this site first
http://www.buildourown.org.uk

 

[khoock37]

Sorry my fingers pressed too fast.

To have a rough idea of what you ae going thru, go to this site http://www.buildourown.org.uk. On the right pane ->Building-> the Drives.

 

[griffinspc]

Well lets compare;

Lacie
Interface: Hi-Speed USB (USB 1.1 compatible)
Rotational Speed (rpm): 7200
Interface Transfer Rate: 480 Mbits/s
Max sustained transfer rate: up to 34 MB/s
Average seek time (write): <11 ms; Buffer: 2 MB

WD
Capacity (GB) 200
Interface Ultra ATA-100
Spindle Speed (RPM) 7200
Buffer Memory 8MB
Average Seek (msec) 9.5
Average Latency 4.2
Maximum External Transfer Rate (Mbits/sec) 100
Track-to-Track Seek Time (typical read, ms) 2.0
Full Stroke Seek Time (normal seek) 21.0

I wouldn't substitute the Lacie for the WD as my main drive but I'd think about what you paid. If you bought the WD for about $120 or less and the Lacie goes for between $150 and $175 and they screwed up you might be well off if you can afford it, to keep the Lacie and still order a new WD. You'll have both and may never use all that storage but you may look at it as an early Christmas present.

To answer you directly, no you can't use the Lacie as a substitute for an internal "main" drive. No, it's not difficult to install a new hard drive but as I'm sure you know you'll have to install a fresh OS or "ghost" the old OS onto the new drive if you plan to make the new drive the boot master.

If you planned to keep the old drive as your main or "boot" drive (you don't say if you were just getting the new WD ATA for storage or to replace an old slow HD) then I'd keep the Lacie and that would be it.

 

[griffinspc]

if i was just running games/listening to music off it would it run generally similar to an internal one?

Just read this a second time. It sounds like you mean to use this as storage and also games. Games means you intend to install to this location. High speed, high impact games I would think will not run as well off a USB drive. I'm not a gamer but the transfer rate and buffer become important. Maybe a gamer will comment.

I still think if I could afford it I'd keep the lacie and order another WD, maybe a 80GB WD with the same specs which you can get pretty darn cheap.

Here's one for $60.00. I own two and they're great drives. http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=22-144-122&depa=1

 

[Infernus]

^^^^ thanks for all the info...much appreciated.

I already have a 60GB internal main drive which i was gonna keep as the main drive. I only bought a new one so that i could store and listen/watch music and video files and install some games on it (some games are in excess of 5GB these days). My OS and programs/apps would stay on my old one.

I cant afford to buy another WD.

Lacie HDD:
Interface Transfer Rate: 480 Mbits/s
Max sustained transfer rate: up to 34 MB/s

which one of these is the actual transfer rate? If its 480 then thats hell of a lot faster than the WD.

 

[griffinspc]

USB 2.0 = 480 Mbits/s (This is top end)
IDE Ultra DMA 100 (ATA/100) = 100 MB/sec

Real world speed varies with many factors but this is a generally accurate statement.

 

[Infernus]

well, i installed the Lacie and its like 5 times faster than my current 60 GB...so i think ill just keep it. thanks for the help ppl.

 

[LockeNess]

USB 2.0 = 480 Mbits/s (This is top end)
IDE Ultra DMA 100 (ATA/100) = 100 MB/sec
statement.

im not 100% sure, but keep in mind that 480 refers to megabits wheras the 100 is in Megabytes, and 8 bits =1 byte, so 480 Mbits= 60Megabytes, which would make more sense since internal connections withing a computer are usualy much faster than almost anything external via USB

 

[griffinspc]

Re-read my entry, you'll see mbits but I should have explained the difference also.

 

[JohnWill]

In addition, you won't get anything like 480mbits from a USB 2.0 connection in real life. USB 2.0 transfers to/from disk on my 3.2ghz P4 top out at around 23mbyte/sec, less than half of the theoretical transfer rate. The same disk drive connected to an internal IDE channel will do twice that.

 

[griffinspc]

Here's a pretty nicely done spec sheet:

http://www.geocities.com/extremetech_linksmaster/speedcharts.htm

 

[JohnWill]

That chart only gives you the raw bit rates, it really doesn't tell you what the real-world speeds are. I've never seen any system get anything close to 480mbit/sec throughput from a USB 2.0 device.

 

[griffinspc]

Agreed johnwill, 480 is "max" burst at best.

 

[~Candy~]

Wow, what a GREAT mix-up if they only charged you for the 200 gig WD drive

 

[JohnWill]

Boy did the Steelers lose, and I was really cheering for them! I figured we'd have an easier time with them than the Pat's. Oh well, we just have to suck it up and kick some NE butt!

 

[~Candy~]

Yep, they definitely threw the game away................

 

[griffinspc]

Boy did the Steelers lose, and I was really cheering for them! I figured we'd have an easier time with them than the Pat's. Oh well, we just have to suck it up and kick some NE butt!

Was rooting for Cowher all the way but now have to go for NE. Can't stand that Philly hot dog show, you'd think making a decent block or tackle wouldn't require strutting half the length of the field every single time!