U320 SCSI RAID 0 vs IDE RAID 0? How big a performance difference is there?

[DaviDaVinci]

For photoshopping, video editing, making divx avi's, audio converting, gaming, booting up, all on Win XP.

I already have a SCSI controller with RAID 0 on my motherboard (Dell Precision 650).

I also already have a couple of deskstar 80 gig IDE drives.

Two 36 gig U320 10k SCSI are like $300 - $100 (if i sell the current two 80 gigs) = $200

Cheap IDE Raid 0 card is like $20

So, Is $180 difference worth the performance gain?

 

[sharkeeper]

If you SCSI RAID0 is host raid, it's the same as IDE RAID. So, the comparison is based on scsi drive vs. ide drive. Access times will be better. SCSI drives run warmer than ATA drives and make more noise when busy. SCSI drives are far superior in multi-tasking. You have a SMP computer so you will notice that. Windows XP boot times are much slower with SCSI, this is the norm. The tradeoff with the ability to work faster and have better stability and reliability is worth it. This is why true workstations use SCSI. People cannot work when unreliable hardware lets them down at the time when it's most inconvenient. SCSI keeps Mr. Murphy at bay. (when utilised at its fullest potential obviously)

If your SCSI RAID HBA is an intelligent variety (true HW RAID that can do 0,1,3,5,10,30,50 etc.) with a parity coprocessor and loads of ECC ram with battery back up, there is no comparison to IDE. None, nada, zip.

-DAK-

 

[DaviDaVinci]

There's no way i'd buy a separate SCSI card $$$$
If i'm only using Raid 0 which this board has, why would I need a separate card? Performance wise.

 

[mastertech01]

Too many people think adding SCSI is like adding a 3GHZ processor to a system that ran a PIII 700. Its not going to be such a huge difference performance wise in everyday use. If you NEED the reliability, flexibility and access times of SCSI then money is not a real concern. If you just want fast and cheap, ATA RAID will do you fine.

 

[Holmecollie]

How about SATA raid - somewhere in between, or not actually inbetween because its pretty close to IDE raid but there should be a sligt performance increase.

However the only SATA raid setup I could imagine is noticebly faster would be running Raptor drives @ 10000rpm that only have 36gig/disk.

 

[isekii]

Originally posted by: Holmecollie
How about SATA raid - somewhere in between, or not actually inbetween because its pretty close to IDE raid but there should be a sligt performance increase.

However the only SATA raid setup I could imagine is noticebly faster would be running Raptor drives @ 10000rpm that only have 36gig/disk.

With the price of SATA drives it's prolly cheaper to go U160 Scsi

 

[dexvx]

U320 SCSI RAID isnt as beneficial as you'd think, especially for a workstation compared to U160. You would need a PCI-X SCSI Raid adapter running at full speed. The performance difference, in terms of raw I/O is significantly better than SATA RAID or ATA/100 RAID, especially when coupled with your PCI-X RAID device. A lot of people here wouldnt notice any difference with their systems because most people's computers dont have PCI-X, but isntead regular 32bit / 33Mhz PCI or 64bit/33Mhz PCI, which is a signficant bottleneck.

If you look around eBay, you can easily buy (from actual vendors) brand new 36GB U320 10K drives for around $150 each, and 36GB U320 15K drives for $250 each. I'd recommend the Fujitsu MAP for 10K series and MAS for 15K series. Even a single Fujitsu MAS 15K drive on a PCI-X U320 controller has the ability to run circles around RAID 0 SATA 10K Raptors.

 

[DaviDaVinci]

"Three 64 bit/100 MHz PCIx slots" on my mobo. I can't find any info. for the on board U320 SCSI RAID 0 controller PCIx Adapter sounds expensive.

Damn.

Maybe I should play with IDE RAID 0 first and see if i rally need to upgrade to SCSI.

Would any cheap IDE Raid card work for RAID 0 using 2 hard drives? like this one

Promise

isn't this the one that can be hacked into Promise 100?

 

[Mday]

Originally posted by: DaviDaVinci
"Three 64 bit/100 MHz PCIx slots" on my mobo. I can't find any info. for the on board U320 SCSI RAID 0 controller PCIx Adapter sounds expensive.

Damn.

Maybe I should play with IDE RAID 0 first and see if i rally need to upgrade to SCSI.

Would any cheap IDE Raid card work for RAID 0 using 2 hard drives? like this one

Promise

isn't this the one that can be hacked into Promise 100?

you cant hack that card into the promise 100. the chip doesnt support that protocol speed. you'll definitely see load speed differences. as well as higher CPU usage since this uses the host processor for RAID support. (software raid). if you have XP, you can do it for free.

 

[dexvx]

Originally posted by: DaviDaVinci
"Three 64 bit/100 MHz PCIx slots" on my mobo. I can't find any info. for the on board U320 SCSI RAID 0 controller PCIx Adapter sounds expensive.

Damn.

Maybe I should play with IDE RAID 0 first and see if i rally need to upgrade to SCSI.

Actually, if you have a built in U320 SCSI RAID 0 adapter, its most likely operating on the PCI-X bus at full throttle. An adapter on a PCI-X bus has a signficant advantage over one using regular PCI (be it 32 or 64bit).

 

[DaviDaVinci]

taken from redhat.com
"With today's fast CPUs, Software RAID performance can excel against Hardware RAID."

Only thing is that I read somewhere u CAN'T boot from RAID 0 when using win XP Raid

 

[socalvvguy]

A SCSI 320 RAID 0 will be much faster than an IDE RAID 0 for applications that use the bandwith... Photoshop and Autocad come to mind. Also, most U320 SCSI drives are typically warranteed for 5 years vs the typical one year warranty for IDE drives.

So, if you have the money and use applications that are data intensive go for it. BUT here are a few things to know about SCSI 320:

To get the best performance of the interface, make sure your MB has a PCI-X interface (not very common except for server MB)
An U320 SCSI card will cost around $300 with RAID 0 & 1 capabilities
A typical 36 G U320 drive will cost around $165

If you want a more cost-effective solution go with SATA interface with the Western Digital Raptor Drives

 

[DaviDaVinci]

so I HAVE PCI-X slots, and i have onboard u320 Controller with Raid 0 capabilites.

The only question I have left is "Is it running on the PCI-X bus?" If so then I wouldn't need to buy a separate controller card correct?

If this is the case then I can afford to buy a couple of u320 36 gig drives.
oh and how much do cables and terminators run? or do they come with the hard disks?

THanks a bunch guys.

This should end up to be a good system for me.

 

[dexvx]

All U320 cards should be PCI-X. PCI-X is now the defacto standard for high end workstation and server cards that require high bandwidth. It is an interface, like the PCI bus. Just make sure that its 64 bit PCI-X (usually 100Mhz, few run at 133Mhz) and is compatible with your system. Check your motherboard documentation, but I think you'll find it confirmed to be sitting on a PCI-X bus.

You can get cables pretty cheap (rounded) at SVC or case-mod.com or the like. However, if you require speciality cables (100 ft long 15 device or something similar), you need to go to a speciality store like hypermicro.com. They should run anywhere from $9 - $100+.

 

[thesix]

Why do people STILL recommend RAID0 for desktop applications like " photoshopping, video editing, making divx avi's, audio converting, gaming, booting up ", after SO MANY discussion and explanation ??????

A single 36GB Fujitsu MAP disk, which sells for $149 at newegg.com ( why go to ebay ) , can handle 50-60MB/sec. If you have two, you'd better use them separately, rather than a RAID0.

If you work with miniDV format, SCSI disks are too small. You'd better go with 120GB+ IDE disks. Yes, even a single IDE disk ( latest from Maxtor or WD,etc.) will handle video editing just fine.

 

[StraightPipe]

I've got 2 80Gig WD800JB I'm about about to RAID0 USing an Adaptec Controller card.