Rusty Nejdl wrote:
quoted text
>> Does SATA300, but has the same "feature" as the OP's Seagate drive:
>> a small jumper that limits the drive to SATA150 unless removed.
>> See below PDF.
>>
>> http://www.seagate.com/ww/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=e2af99f4fa74c010VgnVCM100000dd04090aRC...
>> http://www.seagate.com/staticfiles/support/disc/manuals/desktop/Barracuda%207200.10/10...
>>
> 
> Jeremy,
> 
> Thanks!  Like Aryeh, I missed the jumper.  I'll test this out tonight when
> I get home.
> 
> Rusty
> 
BTW - in a recent test of 2.5" high-capacity HDD, it was noted that SATA 
required significantly more power than PATA. Well 'significant' to a laptop on 
battery, anyway.

Given that single-drive setups seldom stress even UDMA 133 over the course of 
reasonable time spans, does anyone know if:

A) SATA 300 needs yet-again more power than SATA 150?

B) running down-shifted to SATA 150 might actually be a better plan anyway in 
some circumstances?

Easier to maintain data integrity comes to mind as well as power budget.

Just curious...

Bill
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"