• 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.

SATA over SCSI?

badtz

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 10, 2002
Messages
150
Greetings,

I was wondering if there's any significant advantages of SCSI over SATA?

It seems that SATA has really closed the gap between the two, and now there's very little difference between comparable 10k SATA and 10k SCSI drives. But how about against 15k SCSI drives?

How's the sustained transfer rate between SATA/SCSI in the real world?

This is for a non-RAID environment, mostly for audio production [and general computer usage].


Any input would be greatly appreciated!
 
I'm running both- SCSI 15k's have been rock solid and fast for me, but I'm running a RAID10 SATA array and it has been very impressive so far.

If you have the money, I'd jump on SCSI- but stick to SATA for mainstream- you won't be disappointed.
 
On a single disc [non-raid] of both a 15k SCSI, and a 10k SATA ... how is the sustain transfer rate?


in your case, how is the str and access times? [scsi, and raid-10 SATA}


:)
 
WB99 Disk/Read Transfer Rate - Begin
"The read rate achieved towards the outer edge of a drive; usually the highest attainable on the drive."

Seagate Cheetah 15K.3 - 76.4

Western Digital Raptor WD740GD - 71.8



The new raptors are very fast, can be as fast or faster than scsi in standard desktop benchmarks.
 
badtz said:
Greetings,

I was wondering if there's any significant advantages of SCSI over SATA?
SCSI has a well established command queuing system, which gives it a distinct advantage in multi-user environments. Also, SCSI drives tend to be more robust and less prone to failure. Let's be clear, though, that this has almost nothing to do with the host bus interface, and everything to do with mechanical and electrical design.
It seems that SATA has really closed the gap between the two, and now there's very little difference between comparable 10k SATA and 10k SCSI drives. But how about against 15k SCSI drives?
It depends on the benchmarks, like everything else. If you really want to know how certain drives compare, visit Storage Review (.com), where they have a comprehensive benchmark database.
How's the sustained transfer rate between SATA/SCSI in the real world?

This is for a non-RAID environment, mostly for audio production [and general computer usage].
Chances are that there is little real-world difference between the two, in the single-user environment you are working in.
acascianelli said:
scsi = 320mbit
sata = 150mbit
Actually, it's 320 Megabytes per second and 150 Megabytes per second, respectively. Serial ATA-150 actually has a max transfer rate of 1.5 Gigabits per second, unidirectionally.
 
of course that makes scsi 2560mbit under full duplex for u320 to put things into perspective.
 
since it doesn't seem that str is that big of a factor .....


does SCSI advantage in access times matter much in non-server environments?

[audio/video editing?]

:)
 
It sure does. I would assume that audio/visual work involves a lot of spin-ups and spin-downs, and lots of random access. This is where having low access times is so important.
 
To edit uncompressed High definition video you need a transfer rate in excess of 200MB a second.
 
Methodical said:
To edit uncompressed High definition video you need a transfer rate in excess of 200MB a second.

even if one wanted to, how could that be achieved?
 
RAID 0 arrays with several 15k RPM drives, RAM drives.

Though that figure has yet to be substantiated...
 
Back
Top