Ignoring performance: Ide or SCSI and why?

[geekender]

I am sick of my IDE drives failing on me. I am considering a SCSI setup because it is more robust, but I wonder if I am idealizing SCSI in my mind.

 

[Vegito]

SCSI has a longer warranty but it doesn't mean it wont fail.. though I haven't had 1 fail since 1999 when I start using scsi... and i went through about 4-5 ide since..

 

[fkloster]

Ignoring performance: Ide or SCSI and why?

Scuzzy because it is more reliable and less dependant on cpu cycles...

 

[rahvin]

Even if the MTBF for SCSI is higher if you are unlucky you will still see the same failures in the same time (that's why it's a "mean" number). Just back your data up, spend your cash on a good backup setup.

 

[geekender]

I suppose that an IDE raid array would be a better choice than a single SCSI

 

[Markfw]

For a PC, the difference in cpu utilization rarely shows up. I have both IDE and SCSI. With the recent developments in IDE, and from personal experience with both, go IDE. Your failures have more to do with quality than type. I have a Micropolis 72rpm 9 gig SCSI, that had problems in the first year. I also have many Maxtor IDE drives that are 5-6 years old. In fact the only Maxtor drive I have that has failed me is a 230 meg drive (Thats pretty old) Western digitals have failed me and a Seagate or two. IBM's 75GXP fiasco has wanned me off of them. Just try a Maxtor drive. Also, SCSI is quite expensive. You can buy a lot of drives for the difference. Just make sure you have a good backup solution.

 

[LordAccord]

If I had the money I would go full SCSI because it is speedy w/o using the processor at all, and a lot more SCSI hDDs and even CD / dvd will live up to more of the bandwith than IDE does... I mean, 160SCSI will outdo UWSCSI2 will out-do IDE RAID... will out-do IDE (ata100).... and I am NOT going to assume that ATA 133 will do much if anything to help that out. SCSI is just a quicker and more reliable architecture, but it is harder to deal with if you dont know what you are doing... there is a lot of stuff about SCSI that I dont even want to read about because it confuses me so much. Frankly I am anxious to see ata133 and ata166 even compete with SCSI 320 in any way other than price...

LoRdAccord

 

[Goosemaster]

Look at my setup...the ideal for the budget-oriented power user

Have the excellent qualities of scsi for your system drive and a cheap IDE for storage

 

[mastertech01]

I just plain like the versatility of SCSI. I have 6 HDD, 4 CD Devices, a Jazz, a ZIP, Scanner, SCSI Raid array, internal devices and external devices and still have all my IDE free to do as I please..like an LS120. Of course I havent paid retail for much of any of it. I shop around the for sale forums and get a lot of large discounts. But I would buy a SCSI drive that has had 3 owners and been shipped 4 times, before I would consider an ATA drive.. its just personal preferrence and great past performance that keeps me coming back. Ive had my share of ATA raid and the like and too many dead drives to consider it reliable. But thats just my personal view on it.

 

[DrZone]

SCSI drives are supposed to be built with higher tolerances and as far as i can see, they probably are.

However, for a home PC, I think they are an unnecessary cost. You can get alot more on the regular IDE for the price of a single SCSI drive. In addition, SCSI is LOUD !!! If anyone thought an IDE hard drive was loud, i suggest he/she steer clear of SCSI !

 

[Mrburns2007]

The new Western Digital 120g gig with 8 meg buffer beats a lot of scsi drives in performance, the only one that remains atop is the Maxtor Atlas. The only area that it couldn't match scsi was the seek and access time which are still slower with IDE but it did have higher transfer rates then a lot of scsi drives.

Of course scsi is more robust and might last longer but you still have have to pay a lot for such a small hard drive.

 

[Ionizer86]

The new Western Digital 120g gig with 8 meg buffer beats a lot of scsi drives in performance, the only one that remains atop is the Maxtor Atlas.

Wait...wasn't there this Seagate drive called the Cheeta X15 or something? That thing is supposed to be fast :Q

 

[Soulkeeper]

over the past 3 years i have had 7 different ide hard drives and 2 have failed
i am also considering scsi but not because of this
i just like the speed mmmmmmm
the price hurts though

 

[Soulkeeper]

well not counting the one i dropped heh
but it was a worthless 1gb sucker

 

[rockhard]

If anyone thought an IDE hard drive was loud, i suggest he/she steer clear of SCSI !

My Seagate 36ES2's are as quiet as the Barracuda IV with only the seeks being about as audible as a Maxtor D740X with accoustic management on
Now even SCSI can be quiet too.
One observation i have noticed is that while my Western Digital SE may be fast in benches the real world performance crown on my main rig still goes to my new 36ES2's. Theyre not blazing fast, but they do multitask well

Ignoring performance: Ide or SCSI and why?

SCSI - because the SCSI interface can que data IO's, and data transfers can be initiated on the same device and then that device can disconnect from the bus to do its thing allowing someone else to have a go. IDE cannot do this.
IDE given half the chance loves to hog your PCI bus like it owns it
Only things IDE has going for it is the lower command overhead which unfortunately is no help in real world useage and the fact the drives are so damn cheap.