SATA hard drive connections are faster than older PATA hard drive connections and the same can be said for external cabling standards, but this is counter-intuitive: why wouldn’t the parallel transmission be faster?
Today’s Question & Answer session comes to us courtesy of SuperUser—a subdivision of Stack Exchange, a community-driven grouping of Q&A web sites.
问题 (The Question)
SuperUser reader Modest is curious about the data transfer rates of parallel and serial connections:
Intuitively, you would think that parallel data transmission should be faster than serial data transmission; in parallel you are transferring many bits at the same time, whereas in serial you are doing one bit at a time.
So what makes SATA interfaces faster than PATA, PCI-e devices faster than PCI, and serial ports faster than parallel?
While it’s easy to fall into the reasoning that SATA is newer than PATA, there must be a more concrete mechanism at work than just age.
答案 (The Answer)
SuperUser contributor Mpy offers some insight into the nature of the transmission types:
You cannot formulate it this way.
Serial transmission is slower than parallel transmission given the same signal frequency. With a parallel transmission you can transfer one word per cycle (e.g. 1 byte = 8 bits) but with a serial transmission only a fraction of it (e.g. 1 bit).
在相同的信号频率下，串行传输比并行传输要慢。 在并行传输中，您可以每个周期传输一个字(例如1字节= 8位)，而在串行传输中，仅传输其一小部分(例如1位)。
The reason modern devices use serial transmission is the following:
You cannot increase the signal frequency for a parallel transmission without limit, because, by design, all signals from the transmitter need to arrive at the receiver at the same time. This cannot be guaranteed for high frequencies, as you cannot guarantee that the signal transit time is equal for all signal lines (think of different paths on the mainboard). The higher the frequency, the more tiny differences matter. Hence the receiver has to wait until all signal lines are settled — obviously, waiting lowers the transfer rate.
您可以在不增加信号频率并行传输无极限，因为按照设计，从发射器需要的所有信号在接收器在同一时间到达。 这不能保证在高频下使用，因为您不能保证所有信号线的信号传输时间都相等(请考虑主板上的不同路径)。 频率越高，差异越小。 因此，接收器必须等到所有信号线都建立好之后，显然，等待会降低传输速率。
Another good point (from this post) is that one needs to consider crosstalk with parallel signal lines. The higher the frequency, the more pronounced crosstalk gets and with it the higher the probability of a corrupted word and the need to retransmit it. 
另一个好处(来自本文)是，需要考虑与并行信号线的串扰。 频率越高，串扰越明显，随之而来的单词损坏和重传的可能性也越高。 
So, even if you transfer less data per cycle with a serial transmission, you can go to much higher frequencies which results in a higher net transfer rate.
 This also explains why UDMA-Cables (Parallel ATA with increased transfer speed) had twice as many wires as pins. Every second wire was grounded to reduce crosstalk.
Scott Chamberlain echoes Myp’s answer and expands upon the economics of design:
The problem is synchronization.
When you send in parallel you must measure all of the lines at the exact same moment, as you go faster the size of the window for that moment gets smaller and smaller, eventually it can get so small that some of the wires may still be stabilizing while others are finished before you ran out of time.
By sending in serial you no longer need to worry about all of the lines stabilizing, just one line. And it is more cost efficient to make one line stabilize 10 times faster than to add 10 lines at the same speed.
Some things like PCI Express do the best of both worlds, they do a parallel set of serial connections (the 16x port on your motherboard has 16 serial connections). By doing that each line does not need to be in perfect sync with the other lines, just as long as the controller at the other end can reorder the “packets” of data as they come in using the correct order.
诸如PCI Express之类的东西在两全其美方面发挥了最大作用，它们完成了一组并行的串行连接(主板上的16x端口具有16个串行连接)。 通过这样做，只要另一端的控制器可以按照正确的顺序对数据的“数据包”进行重新排序，就不必与其他行完美同步。
The How Stuff Works page for PCI-Express does a very good explination in depth on how PCI Express in serial can be faster than PCI or PCI-X in parallel.
TL;DR Version: It is easier to make a single connection go 16 times faster than 8 connections go 2 times faster once you get to very high frequencies.
Have something to add to the explanation? Sound off in the the comments. Want to read more answers from other tech-savvy Stack Exchange users? Check out the full discussion thread here.
有什么补充说明吗？ 在评论中听起来不对。 是否想从其他精通Stack Exchange的用户那里获得更多答案？ 在此处查看完整的讨论线程。