SCSI Hard Drives for Home comp ??
Bookmark this page:
 Yahoo!
 Google
 Windows Live
 del.icio.us
 digg
 Netscape
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Trimble Bracegirdle on May 7, 2007, 2:23 pm
Please log in for more thread options E6600 @ 3.2 Gig, Geforce 8800 ...Win XP or VISTA. I'm becoming increasingly aware of speed limitations with standard SATA2 hard drives I have. looked at the Raptor Drives ...far to expensive for the little improvement Re. standard SATA2 . I really don't like the prospect of RAID...I would need at least 2 identical drives with a reduction in reliability (2 rather than 1 thing to go wrong) ...to get RAID speed improvement with a good level of error protection I would need SERIAL ATTACHED SCSI3 or more drives ...all to complicated . SOOO ! what about SCSI Hard drives ...I see Rpm's of 15000 ..access times less than 1/2 that of standard SATA2 ..the only way it could into go in my system is (presumably) with a controller card into the standard PCI slots (33 MHz) ...does that have the speed ??. Orthough there is now something called 'SERIAL ATTACHED SCSI' I don't seem to see this approached ever mentioned in connection to IBM PC comp. Home computers so I guess the answer is NO !! Some one want to tell why ? (\__/) (='.'=) (")_(") mouse | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Tim S on May 7, 2007, 3:20 pm
Please log in for more thread options How about 4 cheap disks in a RAID0+1 configuration. Double the effective transfer speed, plus redundancy. Probably still cheaper than top of the line 15k RPM SCSI disks + controller. Do it in software, no need for fancy cards for that. Cheers Tim | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by HDRDTD on May 7, 2007, 5:07 pm
Please log in for more thread options You don't typically hear about home users using SCSI drives because of their
cost. Yes they are fast especially with the 15k rpm ultra 320 drives, but if you consider the cost per capacity, you'll soon realize why they are typically reserved for use in higher end workstations or servers. If you're serious, consider the cost of a SCSI Raid adapter for your PC in addition to the cost of the SCSI drives, which at the 15k rpm level come in capacities far smaller that what's available in SATA drives these days for the same cost. For a home PC that you're describing as 'general purpose use', going to 15k rpm SCSI is overkill unless you have plenty of money to throw at it for the performance gain you would get. If you think Raptors are expensive for the performance improvement you get, wait till you get prices on 15K SCSI drives of the same capacity especially considering that you need to add the cost of a good SCSI card. If you want spped and safety, you can always consider a RAID 5 array or a RAID 10 array. > With my newly put together Home Computer ...games , general purpose use,
> C2D E6600 @ 3.2 Gig, Geforce 8800 ...Win XP or VISTA. > I'm becoming increasingly aware of speed limitations with standard SATA2 > hard drives I have. > looked at the Raptor Drives ...far to expensive for the little improvement > Re. > standard SATA2 . > I really don't like the prospect of RAID...I would need at least 2 > identical drives with a reduction > in reliability (2 rather than 1 thing to go wrong) ...to get RAID speed > improvement with a > good level of error protection I would need SERIAL ATTACHED SCSI3 or more > drives ...all to complicated . > > SOOO ! what about SCSI Hard drives ...I see Rpm's of 15000 ..access times > less than 1/2 > that of standard SATA2 ..the only way it could into go in my system is > (presumably) > with a controller card into the standard PCI slots (33 MHz) ...does that > have the speed ??. > Orthough there is now something called 'SERIAL ATTACHED SCSI' > > I don't seem to see this approached ever mentioned in connection to IBM PC > comp. Home computers > so I guess the answer is NO !! > Some one want to tell why ? > (\__/) > (='.'=) > (")_(") mouse > | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by on May 7, 2007, 5:20 pm
Please log in for more thread options It depends how one prioritizes. Personally I hate drive failures,
and have been running the same set of four Seagate 15K.3 drives for almost five years now. They're built like tanks, run at 30C at load and are virtually silent. My Adaptec 39320 controller cost $60 from eBay. > You don't typically hear about home users using SCSI drives because of their
> cost. Yes they are fast especially with the 15k rpm ultra 320 drives, but if > you consider the cost per capacity, you'll soon realize why they are > typically reserved for use in higher end workstations or servers. > > If you're serious, consider the cost of a SCSI Raid adapter for your PC in > addition to the cost of the SCSI drives, which at the 15k rpm level come in > capacities far smaller that what's available in SATA drives these days for > the same cost. > > For a home PC that you're describing as 'general purpose use', going to 15k > rpm SCSI is overkill unless you have plenty of money to throw at it for the > performance gain you would get. > > If you think Raptors are expensive for the performance improvement you get, > wait till you get prices on 15K SCSI drives of the same capacity especially > considering that you need to add the cost of a good SCSI card. > > If you want spped and safety, you can always consider a RAID 5 array or a > RAID 10 array. > > > With my newly put together Home Computer ...games , general purpose use,
> > C2D E6600 @ 3.2 Gig, Geforce 8800 ...Win XP or VISTA. > > I'm becoming increasingly aware of speed limitations with standard SATA2 > > hard drives I have. > > looked at the Raptor Drives ...far to expensive for the little improvement > > Re. > > standard SATA2 . > > I really don't like the prospect of RAID...I would need at least 2 > > identical drives with a reduction > > in reliability (2 rather than 1 thing to go wrong) ...to get RAID speed > > improvement with a > > good level of error protection I would need SERIAL ATTACHED SCSI3 or more > > drives ...all to complicated . > > > > SOOO ! what about SCSI Hard drives ...I see Rpm's of 15000 ..access times > > less than 1/2 > > that of standard SATA2 ..the only way it could into go in my system is > > (presumably) > > with a controller card into the standard PCI slots (33 MHz) ...does that > > have the speed ??. > > Orthough there is now something called 'SERIAL ATTACHED SCSI' > > > > I don't seem to see this approached ever mentioned in connection to IBM PC > > comp. Home computers > > so I guess the answer is NO !! > > Some one want to tell why ? > > (\__/) > > (='.'=) > > (")_(") mouse > > >
> | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Timothy Drouillard on May 7, 2007, 7:44 pm
Please log in for more thread options
> It depends how one prioritizes. Personally I hate drive failures,
No argument there. SCSI Drives that are properly cooled will run for years
> and have been running the same set of four Seagate 15K.3 > drives for almost five years now. They're built like tanks, run > at 30C at load and are virtually silent. My Adaptec 39320 > controller cost $60 from eBay. > 24/7/365. That's what they are designed to do in your average server. No question that if your budget can afford it, SCSI drives are very quick. A year or so at work where we do automotive component/vehicle testing, we take digital photos to document parts as they are being tested. For years, our photographer has been running Windows NT4 and Photoshop on a system with Dual 650Mhz P3's with 1gig ram running on 10K Atlas HD's from 9gig to 74gig each. We built him a new system from scratch, running a 3Ghz P4, 2gig ram, booting from a 36gig Raptor and running Windows 2K. He tried the new system for a couple of days and promptly went right back to the previous system with the SCSI drives. That's a great price for a excellent (if not the latest) SCSI card. It's noit a RAID controller, but it's a rock-solid dual channel SCSI adapter. >> You don't typically hear about home users using SCSI drives because of
>> their >> cost. Yes they are fast especially with the 15k rpm ultra 320 drives, but >> if >> you consider the cost per capacity, you'll soon realize why they are >> typically reserved for use in higher end workstations or servers. >> >> If you're serious, consider the cost of a SCSI Raid adapter for your PC >> in >> addition to the cost of the SCSI drives, which at the 15k rpm level come >> in >> capacities far smaller that what's available in SATA drives these days >> for >> the same cost. >> >> For a home PC that you're describing as 'general purpose use', going to >> 15k >> rpm SCSI is overkill unless you have plenty of money to throw at it for >> the >> performance gain you would get. >> >> If you think Raptors are expensive for the performance improvement you >> get, >> wait till you get prices on 15K SCSI drives of the same capacity >> especially >> considering that you need to add the cost of a good SCSI card. >> >> If you want spped and safety, you can always consider a RAID 5 array or a >> RAID 10 array. >> >> > With my newly put together Home Computer ...games , general purpose
>> > use, >> > C2D E6600 @ 3.2 Gig, Geforce 8800 ...Win XP or VISTA. >> > I'm becoming increasingly aware of speed limitations with standard >> > SATA2 >> > hard drives I have. >> > looked at the Raptor Drives ...far to expensive for the little >> > improvement >> > Re. >> > standard SATA2 . >> > I really don't like the prospect of RAID...I would need at least 2 >> > identical drives with a reduction >> > in reliability (2 rather than 1 thing to go wrong) ...to get RAID speed >> > improvement with a >> > good level of error protection I would need SERIAL ATTACHED SCSI3 or >> > more >> > drives ...all to complicated . >> > >> > SOOO ! what about SCSI Hard drives ...I see Rpm's of 15000 ..access >> > times >> > less than 1/2 >> > that of standard SATA2 ..the only way it could into go in my system >> > is >> > (presumably) >> > with a controller card into the standard PCI slots (33 MHz) ...does >> > that >> > have the speed ??. >> > Orthough there is now something called 'SERIAL ATTACHED SCSI' >> > >> > I don't seem to see this approached ever mentioned in connection to IBM >> > PC >> > comp. Home computers >> > so I guess the answer is NO !! >> > Some one want to tell why ? >> > (\__/) >> > (='.'=) >> > (")_(") mouse >> > >>
>> >
> | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Similar Threads | Posted |
| SCSI Hard Drives for Home comp ?? | May 7, 2007, 2:23 pm |
| Using a SCSI backplane with regular SCSI cards | February 25, 2005, 7:27 pm |
| XP Home with SATA & IDE drives | February 26, 2007, 6:57 pm |
| do larger capacity hard disk drives last as long as shorter capacity drives? | October 12, 2005, 11:44 am |
| SATA II (300) Hard Drives | April 25, 2005, 9:04 pm |
| reliable hard drives | March 12, 2006, 7:44 am |
| laptop hard drives | September 23, 2007, 5:29 am |
| Western Digital Hard Drives | February 10, 2005, 10:10 pm |
| HELP : Connecting Hard Drives (non RAID) | April 4, 2005, 10:00 am |
| netgear routers and hard drives | September 8, 2005, 7:10 am |
| Installing SATA Hard Drives Help | December 13, 2005, 6:10 am |
| Are External Hard Disk Drives Bootable? | September 23, 2005, 9:09 am |
| 8 Hard drives and 3 fans. Enough? Or should I open case? | December 21, 2006, 6:10 pm |
| Power Supply For External Hard Drives | December 27, 2007, 3:25 pm |
| SCSI trouble | June 3, 2005, 6:12 pm |
> C2D E6600 @ 3.2 Gig, Geforce 8800 ...Win XP or VISTA.
> I'm becoming increasingly aware of speed limitations with standard SATA2
> hard drives I have.
> looked at the Raptor Drives ...far to expensive for the little improvement
> Re.
> standard SATA2 .
> I really don't like the prospect of RAID...I would need at least 2
> identical drives with a reduction
> in reliability (2 rather than 1 thing to go wrong)