cdr - scsi vs ide

[saddy]

for those who have experience with both scsi and ide cd-writers, are there any major difference to want to get a scsi one over an ide?

i have had a scsi writer before.. which died on my unfortunately, and i'm thinking that i might go for an ide one due to the price factor.. and also, quite tired of having to deal with scsi cards.

 

[andylawcc]

you will have less Coaster with the SCSI and use less time to burn.
of course, you burn more cash too.
but, now with a SCSI card, you can also have a SCSI HDD too!

 

[Zucchini]

scsi = much better multitasking during burn

 

[FatFree]

With SCSI CDR, you can burn CD while you are playing Diablo II.

 

[Vegito]

True, I had friends that used to use ide controller to burn and they had a hard time! I'm using SCSI and it's much better..

 

[Radboy]

IDE burning technology has made great advancements in the last few years, but SCSI multitasks, & IDE does not.

 

[saddy]

ahhh.. i used to multitask abit when my cd writer was still alive. so i guess ide isn't really up for that.

but that brings me to another question.. the scsi card comes with the writer.. how do i know if that card is usable for adding on more scsi devices? save your typing if you can just provide links.

 

[crazyjoekuta]

scsi is much better.

 

[Zucchini]

Yup scsi is the way to go, and by the way.. my burner is the only scsi device on my system.

 

[xtreme2k]

if scsi, go all scsi
dont go partial scsi

what is the point of SCSI burners with IDE hard disk? (you guys with this combo wasted $ on your burner)

if u got IDE hdd and planning to use that with scsi, dont, get IDE writer as well

i got a fully IDE system, made no coaster yet at all... and i do multtask when burning cd

 

[saddy]

initially, i considered ide cos if it's a '8x write' cd writer, i can just do less (still multitask though, just not as much) for about 10 mins to finish writing a cd, then continue to multitask as much as i want after that.. doesn't kill like the 2x writer i had.. full 35 mins to write just a single cd..!

i didn't think the scenerio would be the same for now.. hence this thread.. is ide really that bad? i understand everyone's views on this.. i agree scsi is sweet.. but ide comes very close, no? will be great if someone can post some real life example burning with multitasking and stuffs for each ide and scsi.

 

[downhiller80]

I've got an HP 9100i (IDE) and it used to make coasters all the time unless I burned at 4x instead of 8x.

However, now it burns flawlessly, not a single coaster in the last month or two, playing winamp & surfing da net at the same time.

I don't know what this is down to! I went from w98 to w2000 and from a K6-2 to a Duron.

Seb

 

[xtreme2k]

Seb
it really looks like your CPU makes a difference there

Edit:
IDE burners arent bad at all, i have had one on my 700E, never made a coaster and that was a HP8200i

people planning to get SCSI burners with IDE hard disk... dont... this is the most fuked combo you can have... get all IDE or all scsi

 

[Zucchini]

Your wrong xtreme,

Some scsi is better then no scsi.. especially for the burner part. Ultra ata66 7200 rpm hd's kind of make the ide part less of a problem. I've done some crazy multitasking using the plextor 8x scsi burner. Scsi is better at multitasking, and well its better to have 1 ide drive reading then to have 2 ide drives reading at once.. thats ide's weakness.

also the price difference is nothing really for scsi vs ide burners now. the price difference for hd's on the other hand.. gag

 

[xtreme2k]

what do u multitask?

Quake3 at 1024 when you burn CD?

i dont see the 3% cpu taken when burning on my IDE drive, i seriously doubt SCSI will take that 3% off to 1%. And i seriously doubt IDE will have problem transferring 1.5MB/s data (burning at 10x) to the burner even when heavily loaded

 

[Radboy]

A SCSI-only burner in a system is not wasting your money. SCSI's multitasking/multithreading capabilities is simply more reliable than the IDE interface, which needs to have total control of the bus/channel, and can only process one command at a time.

Never heard of someone with a SCSI burner regretting their purchase. Can't say the same for IDE burners. This is not to say IDE burners are crap - they're not. It's the (true multitasking) *interface* that ur buying when u get a SCSI burner.

And a little side note, u don't want to go 'all SCSI'. As far as HDDs are concerned, if u go w/ a SCSI HDD - to run ur OS, apps, & swap file, u still want IDE HDDs for (relatively) cheap mass storage. Storing things like MP3s, scanned images, back-up files, downloads, Ghost images, & p0rn, on a SCSI drive is wasting money. That stuff should go on an IDE/ATA drive.

IDE burners are good, but the SCSI interface is better for burning. You won't find many who disagree w/ that.

 

[xtreme2k]

i agree they are better at multitasking

but do we on average multitask program that exceed IDE can handle

do they worth the extra $

i got myself an IDE burner, HP8200, considering the new yamaha 32/8/8 drives... no regrets really

 

[Zucchini]

it maybe 3% if your not doing anything, but try to use another drive on the same ide chain or do some other disk access and your going to die. As for q3, i've tried it using my scsi 2x.. it worked Scsi burners also save your ide channels for more important things.. like harddrives and dvdrom

Its just silly not to get scsi when the price premium is almost nothing.

 

[xtreme2k]

at 2x
great that u can burn cd using scsi at 2x when multitasking~

i think i can even DEFRAG my hard disk when burning my IDE drives at 2x

the 3% included hard disk access already remember it is only 1.5MB/s(at 10x) each way, so 3MB/s isnt really much loading on a 33MB/s interface (let alone most of us got U66/U100)

the price premium is not NOTHING
u pay extra for the drive
you also need an extra SCSI controller
and i dont wana mention the performs of some really dirt cheap controllers

 

[Radboy]

IDE drives do not multitask. The IDE interface is not capable of multitasking. An IDE device needs to have control the entire channel/bus to do anything, and can only perform/execute one command at a time. SCSI, on the other hand, *is* a (true) multitasking interface. That's the main thing that makes the SCSI interface better than IDE (not only for burning, but also for running an OS + apps). So, when u say, "SCSI is better at multitasking," that's like saying, "I swim better than a rock." Rocks don't swim.

 

[BigToque]

Unless your already running an SCSI system, I see no real reason to get a SCSI burner.

Seriously... Think about it. You've got people saying they can defrag their drive while burning, or that you can play Diablo 2, Unreal, or Quake 3 while burning!

It takes like 20 minutes to burn a cd on my 4x CDRW. Its like 7 minutes on a 12x! Are you that addicted to your computer that you can't take a 20 minute break from your PC while you make a CD?

yeesh.

 

[Supergax]

I can surf the web, listen to music, even use larger prog's while burning a cd, and I'm running an IDE burner, the HP 9110i. I've never coastered due to it. system goes like this:

500Mhz Pentium III
Soyo SBA+100
2 Maxtor 13.6 gig IDE running raid 0
320MB RAM
Kenwood 72x cd-rom
HP 9110i burner
Pioneer 16x dvd

I never get buffer underuns or any of that jazz. I know it is no scsi, and I haven't attempted to play games while burning, but you can do things while burning if your system is pretty good, I have seen people that won't even move their mouse or something while burning afraid that it will coaster instantly, which really isn't the case. And notice this is on a stinking 500Mhz processor.

 

[PistachioByAzul]

If you plan to be burning at 8x or 12x then definitely go SCSI.

 

[Mears]

Ummm...correct me if I'm wrong, but can ide HDs even come close to utilizing Ultra ATA66/100

 

[PistachioByAzul]

Meary, current HDs can't really make use of ATA66/100. 10k rpm IDE drives should really benefit from ATA66, when they come out.