|
|
Random Nonsense / Geek Stuff All those random tech ramblings you can't fit anywhere else! |
View Poll Results: Serial ATA. Good or bad? | |||
Good | 29 | 80.56% | |
Bad | 0 | 0% | |
Indifferent | 6 | 16.67% | |
Ain't gonna happen | 1 | 2.78% | |
Voters: 36. You may not vote on this poll |
Thread Tools |
03-20-2002, 12:28 AM | #51 |
Thermophile
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,064
|
Better to save your cash and just run normal IDE IMO, IDE RAID is just a way for a few card makers to make a fast buck.
__________________
Once upon a time, in a land far far away... |
03-20-2002, 01:00 AM | #52 |
Thermophile
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Nuu Zeeelin
Posts: 3,175
|
but if it's integrated into a board, no reason not to use it.
if I never get a board without raid on it, I'm going to get a 15k rpm 18gb hdd. Which may be happening very soon, the iwill and abit boards neither have raid
__________________
2x P3 1100's at 1400, Abit VP6, 2x Corsair 256mb PC150 sticks, 20gb 'cuda ATA-III, 2x 40gb 'cuda ATA-IV in raid 0. 20" Trinitron. No fans 2x 2400+ at 2288mhz (16.0 x 143), Iwill MPX2, 2x Kingmax PC-3200 256mb sticks, 4x 20gb 60gxp in Raid 5 on a Promise SX6000. Asus Ti4200 320/630. Cooled by Water |
03-20-2002, 01:02 AM | #53 |
Cooling Neophyte
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 59
|
any mATX boards with ultra160?
|
03-20-2002, 04:15 AM | #54 |
Thermophile
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Nuu Zeeelin
Posts: 3,175
|
there are 1u boards with scsi, but no matx's
__________________
2x P3 1100's at 1400, Abit VP6, 2x Corsair 256mb PC150 sticks, 20gb 'cuda ATA-III, 2x 40gb 'cuda ATA-IV in raid 0. 20" Trinitron. No fans 2x 2400+ at 2288mhz (16.0 x 143), Iwill MPX2, 2x Kingmax PC-3200 256mb sticks, 4x 20gb 60gxp in Raid 5 on a Promise SX6000. Asus Ti4200 320/630. Cooled by Water |
03-20-2002, 10:15 AM | #55 |
Cooling Neophyte
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 59
|
im willing to bet those cost a bit much..
|
03-20-2002, 12:54 PM | #56 |
Cooling Neophyte
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: A.D. 2101
Posts: 65
|
BUT if you need cheap capacity, and you have a raid card... WHY NOT?
__________________
sub_light@yahoo.com long live TRAAM-II |
03-20-2002, 09:34 PM | #57 |
Cooling Neophyte
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 56
|
Can't the highpoint controller used for most onboard raid be used as a regular ide controller? So, it's really a question of is it worth using it for raid in a desktop?
Aren't we at the point where hdd capacity has surpassed what is needed by the average user? I know people always think that, but honestly how much more bloated can windows get? No matter how big the drive is we can still find ways to fill it, but if you have 100+ gigs of space are you really feeling pressed to upgrade? The smallest drive you can even buy now is 20 gigs, and excluding my machine that is more than the other 3 pcs here combined. The only reason I have more is for video work, otherwise my old 8.4 gig is fine spacewise. But I would upgrade it because it's slow by comparison to a new drive. My point being that faster, quieter, more reliable seem like the best selling points now (side note: this makes the new ibm drives all the more mind boggling). I would love to have a smallish 10k rpm drive for the system and a slower drive for general storage, without having to go the scsi route. |
03-20-2002, 09:49 PM | #58 |
Thermophile
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,064
|
I have an 18G IDE for bulk storage and an 18G SCSI for my 3 OSes and most of my programs. It works well and I don't feel short of space in particular.
__________________
Once upon a time, in a land far far away... |
03-21-2002, 05:29 PM | #59 |
Cooling Neophyte
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Lafayette, IN
Posts: 45
|
ok... We all know that scsi has lower seek times and a bunch of other things that make it a lot better that ide.
I'll grant u all that. <Disclaimer> I do not work for any hw companies. Opinions are my own. I like SCSI. I'm not advocating any hardware specifically sorry for the long post </Disclaimer> the one thing that IDE has it's the only cheap solution we have vs scsi. IDE Raid makes things a little better but has these down sides - More CPU Util - Doesn't help seek times Down side to scsi raid (other than cost) - Doesn't help seek times ok... for general reference scsi has ~ half the seek time of ide. I'm not being exact and i didn't go try to find the fastest seek times for both tech. this is just avg times. we have scsi which is relatively expensive, but has very fast seek times and when combined into an array hands down the fastest sustained xfer rates. ide is cheap... has relatively slow seek times and does fairly well during sustained xfer esp in an array. SCSI = Performace platforms IDE = everything else some price comparisons... I didn't go find the largest SCSI u160 drive cause that's a moot point as far as expense. I did go find a 120gb for ide only for a price comparison. everything else is based upon some ppls perception that u don't need that much space. so i found the lowest price for some of the better hardware out there. notice i didn't claim the best. seagate 18.4gb 10k rpm $145 1mb cache fujitsu 18.4gb 10k rpm $153 8mb cache adaptec aha 19160 u160 $147 mylex accelraid a352-2-32nb u160 raid 32mb cache $598 adaptec ada-2100s u160 raid 32mb cache $393 $292 for 1 drive and 1 controller $683 for 2 drives and 1 raid controller wd 120gb 7200rpm $177 seagate cuda 20gb 7200rpm $60 wd 20gb 7200rpm $62 HighPoint RR100 $35 Tekram DC200 $27 Promise FT100Tx2 $69 Adaptec 1200A $85 $177 for 1 drive (generally all mobos have ata100) or $60 for 1 drive (for those who don't need 120gb) $147 for 2 drives and 1 raid controller ok it's 2 drives for the smallest array u can have. i took the price of the cheapest controller so that way u have at least some kind of intro price to raid. as far as serial ata goes, it's hard to say one way or the other... It'd be pure speculation on my part. There is the point that u have to run at much higher frequencies to get the same amount of data over a serial connection as u get over parallel. however, it'd seem really foolish to try to bring in a new tech that'd be slower. It has been shown that serial can compete with parallel (i.e. rambus) when used creatively (i.e. the quad pumped bus or whatever they call the bus for the P4). The only thing that comes to my mind as being a problem would be the cable length. I'm not sure how well high frequencies are preserved over long distances but then again how high will the frequency be for serial ata? it still has to travel at most 18(?) inches. Just some things to think about. Cyph3r P.S. sorry about the long post |
03-21-2002, 08:48 PM | #60 |
Cooling Neophyte
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 56
|
Pretty timely article over at hardware central
http://www.hardwarecentral.com/hardw...inions/4109/1/ |
03-21-2002, 11:57 PM | #61 | |
Slacking more than your weird uncle
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: San Diego, CA (UCSD) / Los Angeles, CA (home)
Posts: 1,605
|
Quote:
-Kev
__________________
I used to throw hot coffee all over the ass of the horse there, then whip him while he was kickin' at me. Those f***in things are crazy. |
|
03-22-2002, 09:31 PM | #62 | |
Thermophile
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,064
|
Quote:
__________________
Once upon a time, in a land far far away... |
|
03-26-2002, 09:00 AM | #63 |
Cooling Neophyte
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Quebec
Posts: 46
|
Scsi raid 5 has changed a little bit since the newest i960 pci controller and raid hashing cpu has accelerated. The disadvatange of raid 5 on the write was the hashing of the xor information for the raid 5 ecc algorithm. It should be faster than raid-3 in write since you are not limited to one disk performance as raid-3. We are currently running many db on raid-5 system and they work flawlessly running at over 10 to 50 megabytes per second (depending on the server hardware. The fastest being a compaq alphaserver gs160) Raid 5 is fast if you have a hardware processor to do the hashing. Most of the latest scsi raid card use the intel 960 cpu and some ata raid card (adaptec aaa-udma use a hardware cpu for hashing). Raid-3 is also slowly removed from the option of hardware raid controller. The latest from dell perc3 controller does not have the options to make raid-3. It is raid-0, raid-1 and raid-5.
As for serial ata. it is already replaced by serial ata2. It will support commang queuing just like scsi. It will also support hot swap. It will also support switches so you can cluster the 4 interface of the board (which are supposed to run at aroung 150megabytes per second at introduction) and connect more than 4 drives on it. It is becoming more scsi than it is ata. Their was an image at comdex about a dell 2550 with a devellopement promise serial ata raid card connected to the hot swap bay on the 2550. Their was 4 drives running each on their channel. Their was also a demontration of serial ata switch. As for ata raid. I am currently running 2 quantum fireball as. their is 1 advantage in file copy and the other one is lower load time for apps and games. Running the game server. it does make a difference in the load time for the next map or the next chapter of the game |
03-26-2002, 02:41 PM | #64 |
Thermophile
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Nuu Zeeelin
Posts: 3,175
|
my new promise sx6000 has the i960 and raid 5 support
__________________
2x P3 1100's at 1400, Abit VP6, 2x Corsair 256mb PC150 sticks, 20gb 'cuda ATA-III, 2x 40gb 'cuda ATA-IV in raid 0. 20" Trinitron. No fans 2x 2400+ at 2288mhz (16.0 x 143), Iwill MPX2, 2x Kingmax PC-3200 256mb sticks, 4x 20gb 60gxp in Raid 5 on a Promise SX6000. Asus Ti4200 320/630. Cooled by Water |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|