PimpG420
06-09-2002, 08:03 PM
I have SCSI Seagate 4.5GB that i don't use but was thinking to use for a new system as a main drive and a 80gig 2nd, want to Raid 0 with two 40gig drives, what is faster two 40gig RAID or SCSI?
Click to See Complete Forum and Search --> : SCSI or RAID?
NDD
06-09-2002, 10:05 PM
What make/model are your IDE and SCSI drives ?
PimpG420
06-09-2002, 10:36 PM
Not sure but it's SCSI Seagate 4.5GB (don't have it here), it's new so will SCSI be faster or Raid?
uncle_jimbo
06-09-2002, 10:58 PM
i think scsi is usually faster
jrb420
06-10-2002, 12:12 AM
Unless that SCSI drive is an Ultra160 10,000rpm drive, build the RAID system. The newer SCSI drives are comparible to RAID and are more stable, but I'm guessing that is not a new drive.
otheos
06-10-2002, 03:59 AM
Talking about apples and oranges.
RAID (I believe you refer to RAID0) doesn't offer anything more than higher STR. That's it! Full stop.
So do you need high STR? are your applications dealing with files large enough that can make use of sequential transfers?
RAID0 has also a large disadvantage. It adds latency to the system that is mosly evident during seeks. Now if a RAID0 was used for its designed purposes this would not be a problem, but seeing poeple putting their OS on a RAID0 (talkin about eating soup with a fork), this has a huge impact in performance.
RAID0 was NOT designed for OS operations, only for data. And I mean dynamica data: read it, edit it, write it, save it somewhere else. That's it.
Now with the modern marketing of motherboard manufactures, using $4 IDE2PCI bridges and calling them RAID, people not only thought that these were hardware RAID controllers (and they're NOT, they are -poorly designed- software driven), but actually though they would make their booting times faster (I wonder, is this what they bought their PC for? booting fast?), and load their large game data files faster.
I remind you, RAID0 was not designed for this, and if you combine the poor implementation of the winRAID controllers and the out of spec use, it's really really poor. DId I mention unsafe? And no, it's hardy the 2x chances of loosing the data due to hardware failure. Data loss is 90% of the time due to **** "raid" BIOS and drivers that lose the array for no reason.
Now, SCSI, is not one thing, there are 6 differend speed grates that offer different features too.
Your little 4.5GB Seagate drive, can be an aged Cheetah 10K, or a newer Baracuda, or if you're unlucky, a Medalist Pro IDE->SCSI incarnation.
So you need to know what you got, what the controller is etc.
However bare in mind this: SCSI, offering in one word great multitasking, and in a second part, lower access times is much more suited for an OS use than an IDE drive (we have taken RAID0 out of the equation).
Even a 2-3 year old 7200rpm SCSI hard drive that cannot offer more than 20MB/s STR, is usually faster in an OS environtmend than any modern 7200rpm IDE drive, even if the latter offers more than 2x the STR (I told you it doesn't count).
So there, take the fact that IDE is a compromised solution against SCSI high costs, and that IDE RAID0 is not even meant for what you think of doing, and take a list and write down your hardware, go the the manufacturers sites, see their spec and come back to discuss :)
RAID (I believe you refer to RAID0) doesn't offer anything more than higher STR. That's it! Full stop.
So do you need high STR? are your applications dealing with files large enough that can make use of sequential transfers?
RAID0 has also a large disadvantage. It adds latency to the system that is mosly evident during seeks. Now if a RAID0 was used for its designed purposes this would not be a problem, but seeing poeple putting their OS on a RAID0 (talkin about eating soup with a fork), this has a huge impact in performance.
RAID0 was NOT designed for OS operations, only for data. And I mean dynamica data: read it, edit it, write it, save it somewhere else. That's it.
Now with the modern marketing of motherboard manufactures, using $4 IDE2PCI bridges and calling them RAID, people not only thought that these were hardware RAID controllers (and they're NOT, they are -poorly designed- software driven), but actually though they would make their booting times faster (I wonder, is this what they bought their PC for? booting fast?), and load their large game data files faster.
I remind you, RAID0 was not designed for this, and if you combine the poor implementation of the winRAID controllers and the out of spec use, it's really really poor. DId I mention unsafe? And no, it's hardy the 2x chances of loosing the data due to hardware failure. Data loss is 90% of the time due to **** "raid" BIOS and drivers that lose the array for no reason.
Now, SCSI, is not one thing, there are 6 differend speed grates that offer different features too.
Your little 4.5GB Seagate drive, can be an aged Cheetah 10K, or a newer Baracuda, or if you're unlucky, a Medalist Pro IDE->SCSI incarnation.
So you need to know what you got, what the controller is etc.
However bare in mind this: SCSI, offering in one word great multitasking, and in a second part, lower access times is much more suited for an OS use than an IDE drive (we have taken RAID0 out of the equation).
Even a 2-3 year old 7200rpm SCSI hard drive that cannot offer more than 20MB/s STR, is usually faster in an OS environtmend than any modern 7200rpm IDE drive, even if the latter offers more than 2x the STR (I told you it doesn't count).
So there, take the fact that IDE is a compromised solution against SCSI high costs, and that IDE RAID0 is not even meant for what you think of doing, and take a list and write down your hardware, go the the manufacturers sites, see their spec and come back to discuss :)
NDD
06-10-2002, 06:56 PM
All you need is otheos when it comes to "storage" :rolleyes: :)
otheos
06-11-2002, 03:39 AM
Thanks ND, but really there are users in these forums that are far more knowledgable. I just try to set a few records straight, especially the RAID0 frenzy everybody seems to be in atm.
Anyhow, and to be completely fair, today's IDE disks with 7200rpm can provide quite high single user perfrormance level, putting the need of a SCSI storage subsystem into the luxurious and not necessary accesories.
So you can save with an IDE drive, and have great performance, but if you have the money, then SCSI is the way to go :)
Anyhow, and to be completely fair, today's IDE disks with 7200rpm can provide quite high single user perfrormance level, putting the need of a SCSI storage subsystem into the luxurious and not necessary accesories.
So you can save with an IDE drive, and have great performance, but if you have the money, then SCSI is the way to go :)
Peter M
06-11-2002, 05:35 AM
Greetings!
Also consider the reliability factor. SCSI drives offer some safety here, with automatic - and transparent, i.e. invisible to the system - reallocation of data away from weak spots on the media (on reads _and_ writes, no data loss!), and much more sturdy hardware anyway.
Compare that to the average IDE drive. They're all built for cheap capacity - zero spare tracks, no reallocation of bad blocks. Want to run RAID striping? Welcome to a DOUBLED failure probability.
regards, Peter
Also consider the reliability factor. SCSI drives offer some safety here, with automatic - and transparent, i.e. invisible to the system - reallocation of data away from weak spots on the media (on reads _and_ writes, no data loss!), and much more sturdy hardware anyway.
Compare that to the average IDE drive. They're all built for cheap capacity - zero spare tracks, no reallocation of bad blocks. Want to run RAID striping? Welcome to a DOUBLED failure probability.
regards, Peter
Fritz44
06-11-2002, 08:36 AM
SCSI! Just installed my first and it IS fast.........
I'll never go back unless IDE can do what the SCSI is doing now.
Fritz44
I'll never go back unless IDE can do what the SCSI is doing now.
Fritz44
Ankerson
06-11-2002, 09:24 AM
SCSI every day of the week and twice on Sunday.:D
You can have IDE.:r
You can have IDE.:r
NDD
06-11-2002, 07:48 PM
Peter Missel joined us too :)
"Pro League"
"Pro League"
SysOpt.com
Copyright Internet.com Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Copyright Internet.com Inc. All Rights Reserved.