Is SAS-3 drive defragmentation ~100% faster than on SATA III if they have same specs and data?

[Thy Grand Voidinesss]

More than one manufacturer makes now huge 7200 RPM HDDs with [almost exactly] the same specs within a given line of drives - but one storage device with SATA III [6 Gbit/s] interface and its counterpart with SAS-3 [12 Gbit/s]

Assuming they both hold the very same data arranged in the sane places and also perfectly operating conditions are achieved, will SAS-3 HDD do a job of defragmenting quicker than SATA III drive made by the same manufacturer?

[Thy Grand Voidinesss]

Can anyone shed some light on this?

[therube]

job of defragmenting

When you say "defragmenting", you do mean, defragmenting?
And if so, why the concern (particularly) over defragmenting?

(I would suspect, that mostly, these days [& with exceptions], files are generally defragmented [or very low fragmented]. And then your OS, most likely, does some defragmentation, automatically, periodically.)

[Thy Grand Voidinesss]

I need to make a process of load-up of huge sets of files to various programs quicker. And also to be able to make it quicker to find something without usage of Everything

And I have turned off automatic defragmentation long time ago, as far as when I was using Windows XP if not 98, so that it would not slow my work whenever it decides to do defragment

[Thy Grand Voidinesss]

Can anybody add anything to this topic?

[void]

It will come down to the hard drive read and write speeds.

The interface will have little impact on performance.



Please avoid completely filling your drive if possible.
A drive should never be fragmented if it is never filled.