SCSI speed

[Googer]

Originally posted by: bob4432

Originally posted by: mechBgon
StorageReview's benchmarks notwithstanding, my 15k SCSI drive doesn't drop frames where my 8MB NCQ SATA drive does, and it still belts out an Office AIP install in less than half the wall time, too. Maybe no one told the SCSI drive it's supposed to be laughed out of the building, because it isn't payin' attention.

And that's on my ho-hum $35 LSI Logic Ultra160 card, nothing too spectacular there.

QFT...

op, honestly with 8 drives you are going to max out the pci slot unless you have a 66MHz pci board, which doesn't sound like it. also, those drives are loud due to the fact that they are a little older, being u160.

tha being said, don't stripe them, just use 1 as a sysstem hdd or all in a external enclosure with raid 5 or some combination if your card will allow. sure it will max out the bus but at least you will have redundancy.

Well he can use the eight drives on the PCI bus, just as long as it is not his primary storage drive; it would be better suited to rarely accessed archival and download storage for programs and mp3's.

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: Pariah
What relevance does a 15k drive have to the 7 year old 10k drive in this thread?

The point is mainly that if you listen only to StorageReview, they'd probably tell you that my SATA drive is better than my SCSI drive. For some stuff, perhaps it is; you get a lot of storage for the dollar, it's quieter when seeking... *gropes for any other benefits* ...and it isn't on the PCI bus.

A pity there aren't any sub-$100 PCI-E SCSI cards yet.

 

[Googer]

Originally posted by: mechBgon

Originally posted by: Pariah
What relevance does a 15k drive have to the 7 year old 10k drive in this thread?

The point is mainly that if you listen only to StorageReview, they'd probably tell you that my SATA drive is better than my SCSI drive. For some stuff, perhaps it is; you get a lot of storage for the dollar, it's quieter when seeking... *gropes for any other benefits* ...and it isn't on the PCI bus.

A pity there aren't any sub-$100 PCI-E SCSI cards yet.

There probably will not be any for a few years to come.

 

[Pariah]

Originally posted by: mechBgon

Originally posted by: Pariah
What relevance does a 15k drive have to the 7 year old 10k drive in this thread?

The point is mainly that if you listen only to StorageReview, they'd probably tell you that my SATA drive is better than my SCSI drive. For some stuff, perhaps it is; you get a lot of storage for the dollar, it's quieter when seeking... *gropes for any other benefits* ...and it isn't on the PCI bus.

A pity there aren't any sub-$100 PCI-E SCSI cards yet.

I'm not sure what magical SCSI drive you own, or why you feel the need to bring it up in half the SCSI drive threads, even if it isn't relevant, as if it is representative of every SCSI drive ever released, but I have over a dozen SCSI drives in my house that I use from Seagate, Maxtor and IBM including one from all 4 generations of 15k, and multiple 10k models, so I certainly don't need SR to tell me how a 15k/10k SCSI drive performs vs ATA. However, since SR's results for the most part mirror the experiences I have with the drives, it is much easier to reference them than let everyone from these boards visit my house and see for themselves. For comparison, I also own a Seagate 7200.8 and 7200.9, which are both complete dogs performance wise, though that is not an issue for storage drives, as well as 250GB WD and Maxtor which I would say are faster or comparable in speed to all my SCSI drives except the 15k.3 and Atlas 15K II. They're certainly faster than my X15 and faster the vast majority of time vs my X15-36LP as well. Compared to some of my older 10k drives, Atlas 10K II for example, there is no question, that not a sole on this planet would pick the 10K II as being faster than the ATA drives in a blind test, and the Atlas would beat the hell out of the Seagate drive in this thread. So again, I don't need SR to tell me which drives would be faster. A modern ATA drive would trash the 10k Seagate referenced above. It would not feel faster, it would not be faster, and RAID'ing them would not help either.