Pro/Forums - View Single Post

jkstrsn · 03-06-2006, 10:52 PM

Hello all, this is my first post, thanks in advance for your input.

Background: I have a 10+ year old IBM315 server, running NT4, with a 4 gb scsi hard disk. This piece of gear has a Pentium Pro 200 processor, and has been rock solid for the entire time I've owned it. Unfortunately I've greatly outgrown its space.

I have a small office with 5 computers accessing the fileserver, we heavily use shared Quickbooks and Q&A databases. Although we don't have a large number of users, speedy access to these databases to run reports and do operations is essential to keep us humming.

So, wanting to avoid Windows licensing hassles, after much research I picked up a Powervault 705N on eBay, which arrived in like new condition. What I've found is that while the unit has the storage I need and the security of RAID, it is quite a bit slower in throughput than my old IBM. Comparing a database stored on the Powervault to an identical one stored on the IBM, it takes from 10 to 40% longer to do an operation on the Powervault versus the IBM, depending on the operation (copy, report, etc.)

The Snap is:
Model Software Hardware Serial# BIOS
705N 3.1.618 (US) 2.2.1 515803 2.4.437

My question for you is, would a newer generation Snap such as a 4200 (or do I need a 4500 which is a bit more than I can spend) meet my needs, or will I be unlikely to be happy with a Snap after using the IBM with SCSI? Is 10 year old SCSI just faster than ATA all around, or is the limit the slower processor in the 4100?

I'm really considering trying a 4200 (I can get my $$ back out of the 4100) but I'd appreciate your input. My budget is maybe 1500-2000 but I could stretch it a bit if I have to.

Is SCSI the difference or not? And do you think the newer Snap will meet my needs?

Thanks, Jeff

03-06-2006, 10:52 PM	#1
jkstrsn Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: USA Posts: 14	How fast is the 4200? Hello all, this is my first post, thanks in advance for your input. Background: I have a 10+ year old IBM315 server, running NT4, with a 4 gb scsi hard disk. This piece of gear has a Pentium Pro 200 processor, and has been rock solid for the entire time I've owned it. Unfortunately I've greatly outgrown its space. I have a small office with 5 computers accessing the fileserver, we heavily use shared Quickbooks and Q&A databases. Although we don't have a large number of users, speedy access to these databases to run reports and do operations is essential to keep us humming. So, wanting to avoid Windows licensing hassles, after much research I picked up a Powervault 705N on eBay, which arrived in like new condition. What I've found is that while the unit has the storage I need and the security of RAID, it is quite a bit slower in throughput than my old IBM. Comparing a database stored on the Powervault to an identical one stored on the IBM, it takes from 10 to 40% longer to do an operation on the Powervault versus the IBM, depending on the operation (copy, report, etc.) The Snap is: Model Software Hardware Serial# BIOS 705N 3.1.618 (US) 2.2.1 515803 2.4.437 My question for you is, would a newer generation Snap such as a 4200 (or do I need a 4500 which is a bit more than I can spend) meet my needs, or will I be unlikely to be happy with a Snap after using the IBM with SCSI? Is 10 year old SCSI just faster than ATA all around, or is the limit the slower processor in the 4100? I'm really considering trying a 4200 (I can get my $$ back out of the 4100) but I'd appreciate your input. My budget is maybe 1500-2000 but I could stretch it a bit if I have to. Is SCSI the difference or not? And do you think the newer Snap will meet my needs? Thanks, Jeff