Doornkaat wrote on 2020-02-06, 12:16:

Under Win98 and with any Pentium III CPU I'd be really suprised if there was a relevant difference between integrated 100MB/s IDE and SATA1. The CPU should be a greater bottleneck in anything but synthetic benchmarks and large file transfers, while the relatively small random reads and writes of Win98 startup, loading games and other applications will profit greatly of fast access times even on the slower IDE controller integrated into the chipset.
Maybe you're circumventing the slightly bugged southbridge causing data corruption under certain conditions so that's a good thing but speedwise I say the effect is placebo.

And I'm not trying to play computer police anyway so if it floats your boat that's fine with me. 😉👍

You know a lot more than me, so you're probably right 😀

But what I experienced:

I had the idea that Windows 98 booted faster, but that's just a feeling ofcourse.

But I really thought that when windows was formatting the disk to prepare it for installation (blue screen with the green window saying 0-100%) it formatted it faster, than when using the IDE port. Both times I used the same partition size (if you choose a smaller one, it ofcourse would go faster.)

Edit: decided to cancel my order, and just go with IDE and the IDE sata adapter. Thanks for advicing me 🙂