• 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.

When will the SCSI ignorance end?!

V

Vertigo Acid

2(-log[H+])4u
Joined
May 31, 2003
Messages
12,410
I just got done reading a FS/T thread where the seller of some 4.3gb Ultra-2 7200RPM SCSI drives is claiming that they are faster than most IDE drives out there... 20mb/s bandwidth, [font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]4.8 to 7.32 MB/s, depending on location on the platters, is all I could find online. Sigh...
We need a SCSI education campaign or something
[/font]
 
perplex said:
"...Except for 15k..." but the <15k SCSI drives are ancient so you it doesn't count? :confused:
Click to expand...
You seem to be lacking a verb, so I honestly can't figure out what you were trying to say.

edit: but I'll just justify my post by stating that the 15k drives are in a league of their own, when it comes to speed, but also when it comes to price. You can't compare 15k SCSI to anything else.
 
PCJ said:
You seem to be lacking a verb, so I honestly can't figure out what you were trying to say.

edit: but I'll just justify my post by stating that the 15k drives are in a league of their own, when it comes to speed, but also when it comes to price. You can't compare 15k SCSI to anything else.
Click to expand...

lol sorry. minus the "you" :)

what i meant was, businesses use 15k so there's no point saying a raptor beats a 5 year old 7200RPM SCSI disk
 
the point is that businesses want the best, and they don't care about money, because having faster databases will get them the money back easily. Why else would the new 32-way IBM x460 start at about 400000 bucks?

For the home user, the raptor is the fastest thing that should be considered. Dual 74gb raptors with a good controller are maybe 500. And without a controller (onboard isn't THAT horrible), you can get dual 74gb raptor action for like 300 bucks. Two 15k rpm drives with a decent controller are like 1000, probably a bit more.

So, paying 3 times as much for a large increase in speed over 7200rpm might be worth it, but paying 2-3 times as much for a tiny increase over raptors is idiotic for a home user.


However, the original point of the post was that non-15k scsi drives suck, and there's no need to prove that. He was also talking about a home user, and no home user, no matter how psyc[H]otic, needs 15k drives.
MrD got it pretty right when he said that SCSI was a mindset, nothing else.
 
PCJ said:
agreed. Except for 15k drives, the raptors beat out all SCSI in performance. However, SCSI still wins when it comes to redundeancy, scaleability, etc.

This is a pretty good guide:
http://sharkyforums.com/showthread.php?t=268718
Click to expand...


Yes when will the ignorance end.

The Fujitsu MAT series and the Maxtor Atlas 10k V are faster then the Raptor. Both of which are 10k rpm drives. In fact the raptor is almost equal to the previous generation 10k drives because thats basically what it is.

As for being more expensive I am currently using a 73gb Maxtor Atlas 10k V which I paid $160 for. So for me it was a no contest to get it over a Raptor. If you look you can find better deals. I also have a pci-X motherboard so I get some improvements there too.
 
There are some ancient 15K drives that will get schooled by the Raptor on the desktop - Cheetah 15K.1/.2, Fujitsu MAN, IBM branded 15K drives, etc. These drives simply do not have the density, buffer size/strategy, and often interface transfer rates it takes to deliver great desktop performance.

Also, if you're willing to accept 36GB capacity, excellent 15K drives can be had for in the $200 neighborhood. Still impractical for most users. Draksia is also correct that the 10KV and Fujitsu MAT series are capable of besting the Raptor in 10,000RPM on the desktop, and are an excellent choice if your system is SCSI ready. However, the gap between those 10K SCSI drives and WD740GD is fairly small, and most users will benefit more fro mthe simplfied connectivity than the modest performance boost. IMO, if you're going to use SCSI in a desktop, you need to go whole hog with the latest and greatest 15K drives, or just stick to the Raptor and be done with it.
 
SCSI drives typically shine in a multi-user, multi-access environment. *Modern* SCSI drives typically have seek times that are less than half that of a typically SATA or PATA drive. Additionally, SCSI has had tagged command queueing for many, many years -- it's mature and stable and really helps out when requests are flying down the bus at it several at a time. Additionally SCSI is a much more efficient protocol itself when servicing multiple requests due to its ability for devices to disconnect while retrieving data and reconnect when it's ready, leaving the bus free for other devices.

But, as the original poster stated, there's no use comparing old SCSI drives to modern PATA/SATA drives.
 
PCJ said:
agreed. Except for 15k drives, the raptors beat out all SCSI in performance.
Click to expand...

I know this has been touched on, but.....

SCSI drives are not designed for a desktop. They are designed for multi-user tasks and for reliability. A Raptor may be faster in a gaming rig, (single user operation), but that is not a fair comparison. But 16 Raptors in a single chasis and 16 10k SCSI drives in the same chassis and see which one does best. The SCSI will kill the Raptor. The Raptors will put out so much rotational vib, that they will knock each others IOPS down to pathetic levels. Point being.... compare them on a level field. The whole point of this thread was that there is too much mis-information floating around. Statements like this, which I see on here all the time, are not helping either.
 
StorageJoe said:
The Raptors will put out so much rotational vib, that they will knock each others IOPS down to pathetic levels.
Click to expand...
I've read a couple things about vibration affecting drive performance negativly. Know of any good reading about that? The wheels are slowly turning in my head about writing a new SCSI FAQ...
 
Stang Man said:
68pin LVD > 80pin SCA
Click to expand...
People with hot-swap backplanes would sorely disagree with you there

There definitly are problems with cheap SCA adapters, especially at the U320 level, but not on the scale that some would have you believe
 
They're basicly the same only 80pin (LC) has power built into the connector (for use in a backplane), whereas 68 pin (LW) does not. I wouldn't classify one as better than the other.
 
StorageJoe said:
They're basicly the same only 80pin (LC) has power built into the connector (for use in a backplane), whereas 68 pin (LW) does not. I wouldn't classify one as better than the other.
Click to expand...

This is correct. Also, the SCA connector has wires that can set the drive's device ID as well. Electrically, they're similar. Mechanically, I couldn't really say any one is better than the other - but you'd definitely want an SCA connector for a hot-swappable backplane.
 
Droool.....
gotta get me one of those SAS cards
Throw on some cheap SATA drives for storage, and a couple of Atlas 15K II SAS drives. Heaven, heaven
 
Yeah that wouldn't suck. I just got a LSI 150-6 megaraid card from my rep. Wish I would have asked for a SAS one..... oh well.
 
StorageJoe said:
Yeah that wouldn't suck. I just got a LSI 150-6 megaraid card from my rep. Wish I would have asked for a SAS one..... oh well.
Click to expand...


Don't bother right now they have a ridiclulous number of problems with there 1068 chips. There have been something like 10 revisions in the last two months. It is driving use crazy at work. The adaptec solution is a little better except it will not see a single seagate SAS drive currently.
 
draksia said:
Don't bother right now they have a ridiclulous number of problems with there 1068 chips. There have been something like 10 revisions in the last two months. It is driving use crazy at work. The adaptec solution is a little better except it will not see a single seagate SAS drive currently.
Click to expand...

Dude, what the heck? Stop spreading this misinformation. I happen to be directly involved with the SAS1068 chips. They have had far fewer than 10 revisions (and have, in my opinion, been executed very well for a first generation chip of its type) (Maybe you are confusing chip revisions with firmware revisions? That's normal for a chip that's about to go production and is in the hands of most of the major server OEMs for testing before platform release). In fact, it's very, very close to release for production.

The Adaptec solution is nowhere near as robust as what LSI has right now. I'm way too intimately familiar with any possible issues on those controllers and would have no problem at this point trusting my data with the LSI controllers.
 
UICompE02 said:
Dude, what the heck? Stop spreading this misinformation. I happen to be directly involved with the SAS1068 chips. They have had far fewer than 10 revisions (and have, in my opinion, been executed very well for a first generation chip of its type) (Maybe you are confusing chip revisions with firmware revisions? That's normal for a chip that's about to go production and is in the hands of most of the major server OEMs for testing before platform release). In fact, it's very, very close to release for production.

The Adaptec solution is nowhere near as robust as what LSI has right now. I'm way too intimately familiar with any possible issues on those controllers and would have no problem at this point trusting my data with the LSI controllers.
Click to expand...


You are right that was a bit of an exgeration but we have had lots of problems with both the 1064 and 1068 chips but they definetely seem to be more robust then the adaptec. We get lots of no repeatable problems and things that only work some times. The adaptec pretty much either does or doesn't work where as the lsi will some times kind of work.
 
draksia said:
As for being more expensive I am currently using a 73gb Maxtor Atlas 10k V which I paid $160 for. So for me it was a no contest to get it over a Raptor. If you look you can find better deals. I also have a pci-X motherboard so I get some improvements there too.
Click to expand...
I had a 10K 18.1 Gb Segate Cheetah, in my SMP quad Pentium pro compaq. I could only pull about 24MB/s read from it. sure, the seek times were fast, but it doesnt make sense for a home user to have something like this. Maybe my controller was slow.

but, my 7200Rpm Hitachi Sata outdoes that by well over 2x. When encoding video, it can save raw avi at 73MBs. 80 Gigs for $59.00, that makes sense.
 
bob said:
I had a 10K 18.1 Gb Segate Cheetah, in my SMP quad Pentium pro compaq. I could only pull about 24MB/s read from it. sure, the seek times were fast, but it doesnt make sense for a home user to have something like this. Maybe my controller was slow.
but, my 7200Rpm Hitachi Sata outdoes that by well over 2x. When encoding video, it can save raw avi at 73MBs. 80 Gigs for $59.00, that makes sense.
Click to expand...
24mb/s on a 10K scsi.... maybe a 3rd generation 10K cheetah? :rolleyes:
You just proved the entire point of my thread!
When will people learn to quit comparing 6 year old SCSI drives to current IDE/SATA drives? Either they will claim the old SCSI is faster by virtue of the fact that it is SCSI (cue angelic choir singing), or as in this case they will be surprised when yesteryear's technology isn't keeping up with the latest and greatest... :rolleyes: again
 
Vertigo Acid said:
When will people learn to quit comparing 6 year old SCSI drives to current IDE/SATA drives?
Click to expand...

they can't compare 6 year old scsi with 6 year old ide drives because ide drives don't last that long ;)
 
pinglupanglu said:
they can't compare 6 year old scsi with 6 year old ide drives because ide drives don't last that long ;)
Click to expand...

LOL, good one... although I have a 2.3GB IDE drive in my old smoothwall router that still works fine. It's gotta be nearly 10yrs old.

I'll keep preaching about my MAU drive. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top