ATA 100 or 133
 

Which one is faster?


and is the difference noticable?

ATA/133 is supposidly faster, but in day to day use I doubt that you would be able to tell the difference.

However, at this time there isn't a good reason not to get ATA/133 as most, if not all motherboards support it.

It's not noticable unless you're running a server. In which case you'd be using SCSI instead of IDE anyway. Cache size is more important, because 100 and 133 are just peak rates, not average speed ratings. I'd recommend an 8MB 100 over a 2MB 133. More responsive.

On paper, 133 is faster. In reality I'm not sure you'd notice much of a difference. You'll see more performance out of a 8 MB cache.

Tom's Hardware Guide did a great review on ATA133. www.tomshardware.com.

Woah, I'm dizzy :D.

There are a few reviews out there such as this one: http://www.amdmb.com/article-display...D=151&PageID=1

Quick answer - little difference - probably best to decide between drives based on other factors (price, capacity, noise, buffer size).

It's such a close gap it doesn't matter...The replacement hard drive that maxtor sent me was a 133 and my old one was a 100...not a lick of noticeable difference