SCSI & IDE

[Rich H]

Hi,

I'm am currently building my third PC and this will be used for practicing networking and 'real-world' computing.

I will be running Windows NT with a dual celeron motherboard and I am now about to purchase a CD-ROM and 1/2 HDD's. This machine will basically be running as a server.

The question is now, what do I buy? Most people have suggested I go the SCSI route - but why is this? SCSI I realise is less work for the CPU, but does this justify the cost of it? How much better is SCSI than
(E)IDE? Why do companies use SCSI?

Thanks to anyone helping me solve this problem.

[kwai]

its probably not worth the extra cost for your uses. you could better use the money for faster NICs and hub.

ide also makes it easier to trouble shoot.

scsi hds need to go through a price shakedown like ide drives have.

[Stan]

Hi...

Don't how many times I have said that but, here it goes again...

If you want the best performance for the best price, buy any IBM (2 HD) in the 22Gxp or 34Gxp series and buy the Promise FastTrack RAID controller.
Set it a as a RAID0 array and watch your PC flying.

That's what I have set up @ home.
According to some benchmarks I have done, the RAID0 array is faster than a single SCSI U2W HD...
And it is half the price !

Stan

[nilknarf]

First, I advise using Pentium II / III over Celeron. They work better with NT.

Second, use SCSI over IDE. I have found that SCSI works better on NT than the IDE. It is also faster. You can install more devices on SCSI than IDE.

Third, use at least 2 HD's. Mirror them for redundancy. This will give you more reliability than a single HD system. You can do this through NT, or you can use a RAID controller.

BTW,
IDE = Integrated Drive Electronics
SCSI = Small Computer Systems Interface
RAID = Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks

Good Luck! /forum/smile.gif

[This message has been edited by nilknarf (edited 09-28-99).]

[bdog]

How do you "mirror" disks in NT? I currently have a NT box with dual ide 8.4 gig drives, I have everything on one disk, and just manually copy important files to the other disk as a backup on a weekly basis.

[Stan]

Hi

Mirror = RAID1
Stripe = RAID0

1) Two IDE HD in RAID0 is faster than a single SCSI U2W HD.
2) Mirror under NT is not a true RAID (it is a "software" RAID). So, if one HD fails, NT crashes with it !
3) In the case of a RAID IDE with a RAID controller (RAID1), if one HD fails, NT won't even know it !!! and it will still run normally !
4) With a RAID IDE controller, you have space for 8 IDE devices.
The promise FastTrack controller does co-exist with the on-board controller.

Without a doubt, go for IDE RAID.
This is the best upgrade I have ever done on my PC.

Stan

[Stan]

Bdog, to answer your question: if you want to do mirroring under NT 4 Workstation, you need a 3rd party software (don't know any, sorry).

NT 4 Server provides the mirroring tools by default.

Stan

[nilknarf]

Hey,
You can do mirroring in NT4 workstation. I know because I've done it! NT does not crash if one drive crashes, you simply disable the mirroring, replace the drive, re-enable mirroring and life goes on with minimal down time.

NT4 provides the tools for mirroring and striping (RAID 0 & 1), but not for higher levels of RAID.

It's done through the disk administrator program under administrative tools. The builtin help system tells you exactly how to do it. /forum/smile.gif

[This message has been edited by nilknarf (edited 09-29-99).]

[Stan]

Sorry, made a mistake for mirroring/striping under NT4 WS.

But, mirroring under NT is not as reliable as mirroring done with a proper RAID card.
I had a server with a HD failure (NT mirror) and NT fell over with it !

Stan

[This message has been edited by Stan (edited 09-29-99).]

[nilknarf]

Stan is absolutely right about the reliability of mirroring under NT, or any OS for that matter. Whenever you can use the hardware to do something, you improve performance and reliability. I try to use a RAID controller whenever I can for any level of RAID. /forum/smile.gif

[bdog]

Thanks for the info. I think I will save up and get the raid. I have noticed the fasttrack66 is almost twice the cost of the regular fasttrack. Is the performance woth this extra cost?

[Stan]

I would say no.
At home, I have the FastTrack (UDMA33) with 2 IBM's 22Gxp (9.1Gb).
At work, I've set up a test server with the FastTrack66 and 2 IBM's 22Gxp (13.5Gb).
I don't see any difference in performance (disk wise).

Stan