6
\$\begingroup\$

Why is SATA simplex even though it has separate TX+/- and RX+/- pairs? Why can't it be full-duplex like SAS (which has the same interface with multiple ports and is full-duplex). If I am wrong with this concept please correct me.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Unsure if this question is on topic here. \$\endgroup\$ – jippie Aug 16 '13 at 6:09
4
\$\begingroup\$

For backward compatibility with PATA/ATA/ISA, SATA uses the PATA/ATA/ISA command set. PATA/ATA/ISA is simplex because it is a connector to the ATA/ISA/PC/XT bus which is simplex. The ATA/ISA/PC/XT bus was simplex because it was a connector to the 8086/8088/80286 processor data bus, which was simplex.

\$\endgroup\$
0
\$\begingroup\$

SATA is consumer grade electronics it must come cheap with huge capacity. SAS is enterprise grade electronics, they care about speed, reliability and much less about money. Check the price and capacity difference for SATA and SAS drives. So my guess is price to build it.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Jipple:SATA ans SAS have same interface details. SAS can be expanded with multiple ports. When you have interface for full-duplex, why can't use it. \$\endgroup\$ – user19579 Aug 16 '13 at 7:56
  • \$\begingroup\$ That's what I'm saying, because the actual hardware implementation costs extra money and consumer market has very low margins. If in theory a SAS drive would be $1 more expensive than a SATA disk, guess which one will be sold. \$\endgroup\$ – jippie Aug 16 '13 at 15:20

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.