New Hard Drive in Windows 2000 and Ntfs

I have windows 2000 pro and ntfs and I want to change my hard disk because it is too slow.What do you suggest?Going to scsi or ultra ata 100 solution.I want 20 gb space and I have Asus A7v (Ultra ata 100 controller on board).I also have Ava-2904 scsi controler for my plextor 12/10/32s .If I buy a scsi drive can I use this controller?Thnx.
skiaboxAsked:
Who is Participating?

[Product update] Infrastructure Analysis Tool is now available with Business Accounts.Learn More

x
I wear a lot of hats...

"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.

SysExpertCommented:
I would stick with a Fast IDE drive for Home use.
SCSI really only is useful on a server or for multiple SCSI devices.
ATA-100 is cheap and plenty fast.

I would make sure that you backup using the Backup program and create and ERD floppy.
I would use Symantec Ghost or powerquest DrivePro to transfer the partiton from your old to the new drive, unless the new drives already comes with a transfer program.

I hope this helps !
0
jhanceCommented:
SCSI is faster than IDE/ATA100 but only at the top end of the scale.  If you go for a SCSI LVD 160 or 320 model they are between 2 and 5 times faster than ATA100 especially if you get a high-end bus-mastering SCSI controller.

Otherwise, I agree with SysExpert that ATA100 is a better value.  They are darned fast and a lot cheaper than a SCSI disk system.

BTW, the Apaptec 2904 is SLOW.  So unless you intend to upgrade, stick with ATA100.
0
jhanceCommented:
Isn't there an issue with W2K and ATA100 operation?  It seems I saw another expert post a reference to a MS article that described an issue that is still unresolved with SP2 that prevented anything beyond ATA66 operation with 2000.
0
10 Tips to Protect Your Business from Ransomware

Did you know that ransomware is the most widespread, destructive malware in the world today? It accounts for 39% of all security breaches, with ransomware gangsters projected to make $11.5B in profits from online extortion by 2019.

skiaboxAuthor Commented:
When I first installed windows 2000 they didn't see the ata but I downloaded a driver from asus site.
0
dew_associatesCommented:
JH (and skiabox) Windows 2000 supports ATA66 both on the controller as well as transfer rates. At the moment, it only supports ATA100 at the controller but not the bus speed.

Dennis
0
skiaboxAuthor Commented:
You mean that it's useless to buy an ultra-ata 100 hard disk?
0
skiaboxAuthor Commented:
Here are the results I am getting from Sisoft Sandra :
< Benchmark Results >
    This Drive:                           Drive Index 0
    JAZ 1GB:                              Drive Index 2500
    ZIP 100MB:                            Drive Index 580
    Floppy 1.44MB:                        Drive Index 60
    Floppy 1.2MB:                         Drive Index 55

<< Hard Disk (C:) >>
  < Benchmark Results >
    This Drive:                           Drive Index 9671
    ATA U100 2x RAID0 7200rpm 40GB:       Drive Index 36300
    ATA U100 7200rpm 30GB:                Drive Index 24000
    ATA U66 2x RAID0 7200rpm 28GB:        Drive Index 32000
    ATA U66 7200rpm 28GB:                 Drive Index 17000

  < Disk Status >
    Multi-Processor Test:                 No
    Dynamic MP Load Balance:              No
    Processor Affinity:                   No
    Windows Disk Cache Used:              No
    Test File Size:                       383MB
    Typical Role:                         Desktop Computer

  < Benchmark Breakdown >
    Buffered Read:                        51 MB/s
    Sequential Read:                      13 MB/s
    Random Read:                          3988 kB/s
    Buffered Write:                       33 MB/s
    Sequential Write:                     13 MB/s
    Random Write:                         3464 kB/s
    Average Access Time:                  11 ms (estimated)
0
dew_associatesCommented:
skiabox, I didn't say it was useless, just that you won't see ATA100 performance. It will be a slight bit better than 666, but you'll never see ATA100 performance. SCSI will give you better performance, but on a workstation its pointless as you rarely experience the need to develop the sustained disk read/write capabilities of either high speed scsi or ATA100 if it were available.
0

Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

Your issues matter to us.

Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.

Start your 7-day free trial
SysExpertCommented:
skiabox : unless you are doing video editing or similar, you will probably not notice the difference.
Save your money for something else. You would need a new SCSI controller since the 2904 is designed for CD ROM and other slow devices.

I hope this helps !
0
dew_associatesCommented:
Skiabox, thanks for the C grade. I'll keep that in mind for the future.
0
It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today
Windows 2000

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.