• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Another raptor or SCSI?

K

kronchev

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 23, 2001
Messages
12,051
Alright, on a whim I bought a 36 raptor from my friend for 50. at the same time I have a u160 SCSI controller installed, and was waiting for a 10 gig 10k drive to come in. well i played with the raptor, its pretty cool, 4x as fast as my old drives. i am told by people that the SCSI will be worse in some cases, better in others, but not signifcant either one. Also I just got the drive and I complelty forgot I needed an 80->68 converter board, and I dont want to spend anymore money. should I just sell the SCSI and controller for another raptor, or is it really worth it for me to get the 80->68 converter board, set that up as my main, the raptor for programs, and my old 80's for data?
 
What kind of SCSI drive is it? What manufacturer? Personally, I hate those 80>68 connectors, too shakey. I'd go with the SATA drive just based on the connector alone. But that's IMHO
 
QHalo said:
What kind of SCSI drive is it? What manufacturer? Personally, I hate those 80>68 connectors, too shakey. I'd go with the SATA drive just based on the connector alone. But that's IMHO
Click to expand...

quantum, from the drive plate it looks like it was for a HP server. HP part number 0950-3341, quantum part number no-friggin-clue, but its an atlas 10k with 9.1 gigs and an 80 pin connector

PS - 5th element, nice :D
 
Being a 9 gig drive it is most likely a Atlas 2 there are a lot of them out on the marker used. Transfer speeds are around 40 meg per second. Access times are around 8 mls by HDtach. I have one in my computer I have 98 loaded on incase something dies in my XP Pro install.

A Raptor is faster.
 
raptor%20yay.JPG


so it wont beat that? the only concern is thats a high CPU usage is it not?
 
Most IDE drives are high cpu usage. Yeah I know its SATA, but still, HDTach is hard to dispute. And like Philip said, that 9GB drive is going to give you higher seek times and crappy throughput, you might get less cpu usage but with the speed of processors today, is it really that bad? ;) Yeah that's a bit high, but all I know is what my 15k.3 used to sit around 2.3% so heh :p

Yeah I would stick with the raptop, it will smoke that 9gb scsi drive. If you really want some speed save your change for a higher end SCSI drive, even the 18GB 15k.3's can be had for the same if not less than a raptor, try www.hypermicro.com Great site, and they have always done me right. I bought both my 15k.3's from them and I loved them. Notice I used past tense cause I had to sell them, and man do I miss them :(
 
Stay with the Raptor. If it is an Atlas 2 your getting it will be .1 mls faster on access. It will slower on Red Burst by about 15 MB/s. The average threwput on mine is around 45 MB/s. CPU usage is around 3%. But if you are into heavy multitasking that requires multi access to the HDD the Atlas might be faster in that. I have been on one computer with a Raptor. I wasn't that impressed when I tried to do some multi tasking with a couple of different programs. It seemed to stall about like a IDE drive would with two programs needing disk access.

I multi task an a regular basis. After I got used to doing it with my SCSI setup. I forget and try it on IDE based computers. Thats when this happens. :( The IDE based computers belong to friends or other people that I maintain them for.
 
QHalo said:
Most IDE drives are high cpu usage. Yeah I know its SATA, but still, HDTach is hard to dispute. And like Philip said, that 9GB drive is going to give you higher seek times and crappy throughput, you might get less cpu usage but with the speed of processors today, is it really that bad? ;) Yeah that's a bit high, but all I know is what my 15k.3 used to sit around 2.3% so heh :p

Yeah I would stick with the raptop, it will smoke that 9gb scsi drive. If you really want some speed save your change for a higher end SCSI drive, even the 18GB 15k.3's can be had for the same if not less than a raptor, try www.hypermicro.com Great site, and they have always done me right. I bought both my 15k.3's from them and I loved them. Notice I used past tense cause I had to sell them, and man do I miss them :(
Click to expand...

would a SATA controller card lower CPU usage down to under 10? it really is a concern for me..
 
if you are running WinXP with SP1, that could be your problem. my CPU score in HDTach was around 6-8% for my SCSI setup, and after i upgraded to SP1, it was similar to yours.

i doubt the CPU usage is actually that high, just a glitch in HDTach.
 
Felix that drive he posted the HDTach of was the Raptor, not the SCSI.
 
unless your SATA controller has an onboard I/O processor (a la i960, etc.), you will not see a significant decrease in processor usage.

During my testing, i usually averaged 6% usage.

cheers,

dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top