How Many of you are/would consider SCSI?

[spikegifted]

Originally posted by KraniX
my WD Hdd out performs most SCSI drives anyway

Really? What drive are you using?

[Nemeliza]

is it a 10k raptor?

Assuming its a top range IDE
Compare it to a top range SCSI and see what happens.

[Zak33]

You all see.....I KNEW this was summit at the back of people minds....

I SUGGEST a few of you buy some stuff.....keep the Athlon 1600+ and dont upgrade yet.....keep the Ti4200 for a few more months...

spend on a few SCSI buts....learn it.....
and then you'll see...
I started with a 40mb/s controller.....and an 8 gig 7200 HDD....and I STILL use the controller and I use the HDD for music...with 2 or three others as well...

SCALABILTY

It saves dough in the long run...trust me.

Everytime you buy a new mobo....you dont read ANY of the stuff about EIDE......you know yours will be faster.....and if you run outta room, you just whack another 2nd hand drive in

Its really that cool

[joshwa]

why not show us some benchmarks you have done?

winbench 99 has some hard drive benchmarks,
Disk Access Time & Disk Transfer Rate
http://www.veritest.com/benchmarks/w...h/winbench.asp

Post your best scores for

Starting Transfer Rate
Ending Transfer Rate
Access Time in ms

[spikegifted]

Originally posted by Zak33
SCALABILTY

It saves dough in the long run...trust me.

Amen!

[BlackSheep]

Originally posted by Zak33
I'm a devotee......have been for years....

I have recently built two PC's for people with 10k ATA133 HDD....and Windows boots lovely etc....
BUT...try reloading the same Game Level over and over......go on.....

SCSI OWNS IT.......and my 16speed SCSI burners are equivalent to the 40 speed burners on EIDE.....

Just wondered....

FLAME ME BIG BOYS......FLAME ME

if you are reloading the same Game Level over and over you shouldn't even be using HDD after the initial load, it's all RAM - so maybe there is some other problem there to account for the drop off in performance.

You can't beat SCSI for performance, reliability and overall QoS, however, if you are serious about your space requirements you can't ignore IDE drives - try purchasing 1T of storage in SCSI and let's see how that compares with 4 x 250Gb IDE drives Running RAID-0 over 2 channels.

You are better off having the best of both worlds - using cheaper IDE drives for storage and having the benefit of SCSI for your boot/system drive and for fast access applications/games ... copying from SCSI to IDE is very very fast (as is copying from SCSI to SCSI over the same bus).

I currently use U320 - 1 x U320 15.3 34Gb for my boot drive and store most of my stuff over the network (which will soon be over Gigabit => no latency problems there) on IDE drives on another PC. I quite like the idea of running a couple of 34Gb Raptors in RAID-0 on an inexpensive onboard SATA RAID controller as these drives are manufactured to the same quality as SCSI (5 year warranty as well) and would provide better performance than having 2 separate SCSI 10k drives (Maxtor ATLAS IV's) on the existing controller.

[spikegifted]

Originally posted by BlackSheep
I quite like the idea of running a couple of 34Gb Raptors in RAID-0 on an inexpensive onboard SATA RAID controller as these drives are manufactured to the same quality as SCSI (5 year warranty as well) and would provide better performance than having 2 separate SCSI 10k drives (Maxtor ATLAS IV's) on the existing controller.

That's what I've done with one of rigs - the Raptors in RAID0 are fast as greased nightning! But I still won't replace it in my main rig as I like the SCSI RAID more.

[BlackSheep]

Originally posted by spikegifted
That's what I've done with one of rigs - the Raptors in RAID0 are fast as greased nightning! But I still won't replace it in my main rig as I like the SCSI RAID more.

mmmmmmmm SCSI RAID

[spikegifted]

Originally posted by BlackSheep
mmmmmmmm SCSI RAID

I managed to pick up a brand new Adaptec SCSI RAID 3200S at a killer price from Saturn Computers (all ex-corporate stuff)... Haven't looked back since!

[Bindibadgi]

If they made scsi stuff cheaper and QUIETER then id consider it definately! There's no poitnt in buying U320 stuff and sticking it into a normal PCI slot, only get the fastest stuff or raid if ur putting it into a 64bit PCI slot (bring on PCI Express!)

Saying that i wouldnt turn my nose up at a 15k U160 Cheetah and Adaptec card as long as i could stick my pc in another room so i didnt have to listen to it. True that IDE sux balls though, but i havent got the money to go otherwise

IDE for stoarge, SCSI for OS imo.

[spikegifted]

But most current SCSI drives are about as quiet as you can get...

[Zak33]

Yeah..its only cos some of them are SO fast that they are noisy.

Benchmarks.......blimey Josh.......you want me to PROVE it.....

Benchmark are no good.....they aint real.....and to PROVE that fact......the mention by Black Sheep of Game loads...

Take a few games that reload EVERY TIME from HDD.....

My favourite game is Sevarance, Blade of Darkness......that reloads over and over...it doesn't matter that I have 1 gig of system memory......when you reload, it reloads TOTALLY...

and I've played it on other people PC's....Deckards is the fastest......Xp1900 etc....and mine is SO MUCH faster

Trouble is...how to prove it to you unbelieving

[spikegifted]

Just how do you benchmark 'feel'... I ran SMP rigs, they're not faster in terms of your average benchmarks, but they 'feel' faster and more responsive. You can't benchmark these 'intangibles'. You'd only know about it when you've been using it.

[BlackSheep]

Originally posted by Zak33

Trouble is...how to prove it to you unbelieving

I know it loads faster, especially when there are a lot of small texture files

[BlackSheep]

Originally posted by spikegifted
Just how do you benchmark 'feel'... I ran SMP rigs, they're not faster in terms of your average benchmarks, but they 'feel' faster and more responsive. You can't benchmark these 'intangibles'. You'd only know about it when you've been using it.

Very good point - when I first used a U160 (Fujitsu) drive a couple of years ago it made Win2k feel so much more responsive - loading menu items, browsing directories those little speed increases all add up to a quite a big difference overall.

Bindi: there isn't *no point* in sticking U320 into standard PCI slots as you still get the benefits inherent in the U320 protocol, however, I see your point as far as bandwidth goes - but for a single drive I have run the same drive on a U160 controller (adaptec) and an LSI U320 controller (both over standard PCI) and the U320 controller is marginally faster in benchys, but that may just be the controller itself ... but granted there is little point in using a U320 controller over a U160 in a standard PCI slot even with a U320 drive - it is far more cost effective to get a nice U160 controller and the fastest U320 drive you can afford