Is SCSI worth the money?

[Dave2]

Right now I have an Aopen 10x DVD ROM, Acer 4x4x32 CDRW, and a Maxtor 27.2GB 7200 RPM HD. They all use the IDE interface. Should I get a Promise Ulta66 controller card or an Ultra Wide SCSI card and replace my hard drive with SCSI hard drive and eventually replace the rest of my drives with SCSI drives? I have 256MB RAM right now so would I see a performance boost going to SCSI.

[Mntsnow]

I will basically agree with what Stan has stated. If you are just looking for SPEED then with the fasttrack raid controllers you can obtain the scsi speeds (and even better compaired to the "older" scsi standards) for less money. If you are looking for lower CPU usage and greater longivity then you might start to consider scsi.

btw I have both a full-on Scsi and full-on IDE systems that speedwise are almost identical in terms of speed (access times (Ide barely beats it) and throughput (scsi comes out on top on LARGER transfers) But when it comes to having the systems do SERVER type work the scsi will beatup the ide in nothing flat! So in short words

IDE = PERSONAL work
SCSI = SERVER work

Mntsnow
*edited to clairify and spelling*

[This message has been edited by Mntsnow (edited 03-12-2000).]

[Dave2]

Today I tried out the Promise Ulta66 card and there is no difference in speed than the onboard DMA33 controller. I returned it and then I tried out the Fast Track 66 and the problem is that I need 2 identical hard drives to take advantage of its speed and I only have 1 hard drive. It doesn't even work with CD ROMs so that's going back tommorow. My only other option would be to buy a slow Adaptec Ultra SCSI card and a small and slow Ultra SCSI HD. I only have $375 of available credit left and I don't think that will be enough to get a fast SCSI card and a big fast SCSI hard drive. I already put alot of money into my IDE drives and I think I'll stick with what I have.

[Stan]

Don't bother to buy a UDMA66 controller, you will not see any difference in speed.

SCSI is better than IDE, that's a fact... although IDE HD are performing very well against SCSI HD.
SCSI is less CPU intensive and you can have up to 15 devices ona single controller. Now, are you going to have that many devices in your PC ?

I have been faced with the same dilemma a few months ago.
At that time, I had a IBM 9.1 Gb (7200rpm, 2Mb cache) HD any I wanted more speed...
I almost bought a SCSI controller (Adaptec 2940U2W) and a new HD, but that was a very expensive upgrade. Then, I saw the Promise FastTrack RAID IDE controller. I bought it with a 2nd HD (IBM 9.1Gb) and configured them in a RAID0 array.
What a difference in speed !!! This is the best upgrade I have ever done.

Now, I am using 2 FastTrack with 4 IBM in RAID0. I have 256Mb SDRam, a G400MAX and I should get my new PIII600E soon (I have been witing for more than 5 weeks now... getting rather long...)

My advice: keep your money, SCSI is not worth it...

Stan

[hd581]

Like everyone else said, I'd stick w/ IDE. The fastest IDE drives can keep up w/ some of the SCSI's anyways. I was going to say it depends on what you think "worth it" means, but you said you have $375. Yeah that's best spent on IDE.

FWIW there's an IBM drive for $335 on pricewatch. Media data rate up to 44 MB/s, LVD, 4.9 ms access, 10000 RPM. also a Tekram DC390U2B controller: Ultra2 SCSI 3 LVD, 80 MB/s. $107. Total: $442 (w/out shipping) not cheap but if you were cheap you wouldn't have a 10x DVD, 256 MB RAM da-dat-da-dat-da-daaaa http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

oh yeah almost forgot to say, that's a 9.1 GB hard drive. whew 4x the price of IDE....

[This message has been edited by hd581 (edited 03-13-2000).]

[welsh wizard]

If you want the best go SCSI, one thing you are not restricted to a small number of units on your port, and the extra quality of data transfer will save on head aches later on.
It used to be 7 on one SCSI cable but with modern cards this has increased dramatically, check out some of the higher end cards at Adaptec.
WW

[PaulG]

Dave2,
The question is what you want to realize with your computer. Why you need the additional speed.
True, I often feel uncomfortable waiting for boot-up (8-10 seconds only)but most applications run fast enough to feel the currently available (technically) additional speed needless and marginal compared to the money I should spend.
(PII@450, 128M/13,2G WD EIDE ATA-66, Pioneer SCSI DVD, Plextor SCSI writer,Adaptech SCSI controller,Savage4 16M + RealMagic Hollywood+ card for DVD MPEG2)
I would highlight some SCSI considerations on these pages (see SCSI vs.IDE multitask operations a bit higher)and to push you toward real-world thinking to find optimal balance between price/Quality/speed.
Correct CD-Writing is SCSI, also, DVD playback runs better on SCSI, otherwise IDE is O.K.
Good luck. E-mail me, what is the reason for more speed?

[Dave2]

I just want to have faster loading times. I think that if you play games and browse the Internet, and program then whether to go SCSI or IDE should be the last consideration. If I had enough money left over then SCSI would be the way to go as long as I don't cut corners on the rest my hardware.

[Stan]

Dave2,

If you want faster loading time, the best solution is the FastTrack RAID IDE controller. It is cheaper and faster than a single SCSI U2W disk (I have tested the 2 options).

Use the FastTrack with 2 HD in RAID0 and keep you cd-rom/DVD on the controller of the mobo. It works just fine ! That's the setup I have in my PC: 2 FastTrack with 4 IBM 22GXP in RAID0. The DVD and LS120 are connected to the mobo IDE controller.

You can not beat the transfer rate of my disk sub-system with any SCSIU2W disk in a single setup !!!

Stan

[Dave2]

I tried Fast Track and I don't want to buy a second hard drive for the increased speed. Fast Track only works with hard drives. I would still have to use the onboard IDE for my CDRW and DVD. I have 256MB RAM and probably won't notice any speed increase by moving to all SCSI. I'm not running a server either.

[oblivion]

SCSI's usefullness can be summed up in one word,and that is throughput(did I spell that wrong?).

And basically that would boil down to you being able to install a program,while moving large files an surfing the web........or bigtime multitasking if you will......
Now you have to ask yourself,do you really need to install programs while serfing the web and moving large files? Cause if you do not then SCSI is probally not for you.

(forgive me if this is a horrid description,but I think I am conveying the basic ides here)

[This message has been edited by oblivion (edited 03-15-2000).]

[Wilan Wong]

Does a SCSI Cd Writer transfer faster than a normal IDE drive?

[oblivion]

What do you mean exactly?

It would not write any faster then its given
speed......i.e. scsi 4x writer writes at 4x
just the same as an ide 4x writer....

It would transfer faster to your system,as it is SCSI....but it would make no difference in the speed it writes...

[Prince]

SCSI does give greater data throughput from CDs of the same speed. It also uses less CPU cycles. However there aren't that many times in normal use where this is going to make a great deal of difference.

Basically unless you are going to need a SCSI card anyway (and with USB around to take care of Scanners these days there aren't that many reasons why you should) the extra money is not worth it.

The one exception that makes this rule is that SCSI is much better for CD burning. IDE is subject to "Blips" in data transfer which SCSI does not suffer. Again though, unless you are doing a great deal of burning you are talking a significant difference in price once you include a decent SCSI card.