which is faster?

320 will be faster because it is SATA and most probably it will be 7200.10 series which is perpendicular recording.
This stands true assuming your 40GB PATA is older drive.

The 40 Gb is far slower the 320 GB, rule of thumb, all else being equal, bigger the HDD, faster it is.

teknoPhobia said:

The 40 Gb is far slower the 320 GB, rule of thumb, all else being equal, bigger the HDD, faster it is.

Click to expand...

Eh wat the???

Who said dat???

U mean to say a WD Raptor 150Gb will perform faster than a ~ WD Raptor 74GB???? ( I mean jus fer comparisons...)

Guys jus make dat point clear plz... neve heard of dat before...

anarchy0x said:

I have a 320 GB SATA & a 40 GB PATA
Which of them should I use for installing XP so that programs run faster?
40 GB must be faster than 320 GB coz of its larger size
But the 320 GB is a SATA drive which is supposed to be faster than a PATA drive
thanks in advance for solving my dilemna

Click to expand...

Don't think more. Just install XP on ur SATA drive.

hmmm:

Hmm , never noticed any performance difference between XP on SATA and XP on PATA ... yes ... 5400 rpm hdd with lower read buffers will mean slightly more access time , but not something drastic .. finally , it depends on how well ur XP is optimized for its performance ..

If u really want more performance out of the SATA hdd than over ur PATA , just keep the page file on the SATA drive , no matter where u install XP ..

The performance boost when using SATA drives is noticeable only when u run two or more drives in RAID ..

Thanku all for replying. I guess I ll use SATA