Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 18th Sep 2009 13:40 UTC, submitted by Robert Escue
Thread beginning with comment 384856
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: redundant SATA storage is generally very cheap
by bannor99 on Sun 20th Sep 2009 16:49
in reply to "RE: redundant SATA storage is generally very cheap"
RE[3]: redundant SATA storage is generally very cheap
by zlynx on Mon 21st Sep 2009 20:12
in reply to "RE[2]: redundant SATA storage is generally very cheap"





Member since:
2005-09-15
You're right on the price, but there is one point where the SAS drives win: 8x10k SAS drive is way more faster than 3x any 1TB SATA drive available on the market. And even not taking the hard drive rotation speed into consideration, SAS is more efficient than SATA.