Thank you!
I hope the following is not to off topic, so I apologize in advance.
As for SATA, I was referring to using a bridge SATA-IDE and connect it to the onboard controller. I was thinking that one would still profit from access times, when throuput is not the main aim. Also my thought was, that you launch an application once and then it stays in memory (or virtual memory) and it would no further effect the speed of lets say copiing files from one drive to another (lets say on an additional PCI-Card).
(only 512MB of the 2GB RAM are used up anyways, most of the time, so there must be enough for swapping files etc. for OS X, I guess? Well, I guess this will have its end of usability as soon as I would intensively use Logic Studio...?)
When using a SATA-PCI-Card, I read that the PCI protocoll negotiations would not make up good for boot drives, so one would rather use the onboard controller. Is that only the case for boot or for application launch as well (I mean, I would see boot times as important anyway.).
I do not know how to link to a post in another thread (saving hole discussions as pdf isn't possible here either, I understand), so I copy your post from another thread:
"A SSD on the internal bus with OS and applications would decrease boot time and application launch over a standard rotational drive.
It would also provide fast VM memory, though, typically due to capacity vs price issues, people tend to have "just enough" SSD.... often too small for the VM demands of OS X (especially Leopard). Then, OS X will run out of VM faster and rely more on memory.
Pro apps will starve for VM as well.
Launch is real fast, though.
A SSD will not increase computational speed. No drive will.
What a drive will do is provide capacity for virtual memory (VM).
A SSD on an external device like a FW drive would not produce good results and likely actually increase boot time and be a waste of the potential data rate of the SSD due to FW bus limitations.
Use of a PCI card and eSATA would provide for data throughput but slow boot due to PCI bus negotiations.
A fast 2 TB drive like a WD Black or Hitachi 7K would provide virtually the same read write speeds PLUS allow for large VM usage thus freeing RAM.
On a 1.5 Gbps bus, a SSD is lost. A fast 2 TB drive with 32 or 64 MB cache is a real pick me up.
If this is all for use with Photoshop or with Final Cut, a second, large drive for VM is essential for performance.
BTW, what need drives your question?"
Found here: https://discussions.apple.com/thread/4827355?start=0&tstart=0
I would use my SATA-PCI Cards for connecting the 1TB drives with files on it, not the OS or application. (Having a Velociraptor 150GB latest revision, which I got cheap, as Boot and application drive).
SORRY for my long winded post!
May I go one step further and link to another question, while we are at it? I heard that you can use the GUID partition to go over 2,2TB for PowerPCs, when you only use the drive for droping files to. https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3847618?answerId=21336931022#21336931022