On Thu, 27 Jun 2002, Rick Moen wrote:

> Quoting Andre M. V. ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> > Few years ago yes. But now, With Ultra ATA 100 around,
> > IDE drives can compete with low/medium sscsi drives.
>
> They're not really directly comparable.  Too different.

The original question was this:
"anyway for better performance and your money's worth, go with scsi."

So wer are talking about performance and cost in
relation to scsi vs. eide.

Consider:

Standard           Clock speed  Bus     Data Rate(command Rate)
===============================================================
SCSI (SCSI-1)      5MHz         8bits   5  MB/s
Fast SCSI (SCSI-2) 10Mhz        8bits   10 MB/s
Wide SCSI (SCSI-2) 5Mhz         16bits  10 MB/s

Now compare it with:

"Huge And Fast: Western Digital WD1200JB With 8 MB Cache"
http://www4.tomshardware.com/storage/02q1/020305/index.html

Read Data transfer:       24-49 MB/s
Read Burst Data transfer: 24-49 MB/s
Write Data transfer:      14-39 MB/s

Bottomline:
Theoretical speed of scsi-1 and scsi-2 standard drives
is no match with the actual speed of the new generation
EIDE HDD. Cost effective too.

> With ATA, you get bottom price per megabyte, usually higher CPU loading,

4.2% CPU usage (anandtech.com) is not a big deal. CPU usage for
server and desktops are idle most of the time in the first place.

> and consumption of IRQs.

Answer to that is IDE raid controllers in JBOD mode.

> With SCSI, you get hot-fix mapping out of bad sectors automatically,

Does the HDD manufacturer already does this for you?

> scatter-gather at the hardware level, ability to
> do genuine low-level reformatting right in the host adapter BIOS,

I certainly hope that this helps SCSI-1 and SCSI-2 HDD performance
compared to the new generation EIDE drives! :)

> more-stable standards, and the ability to usefully have more than one
> drive per chain.

See above.

> And ATA 100 is a bit of a sham, because it's only barely possible to
> saturate ATA 66 with fast drives under contrived test conditions,
> and only one drive per chain can be active at a time.

Not really a sham. In a diff. point of view you are right if you
use EIDE drives the usual way.. The ATA100/133 controllers can
theoretically handle 100/133 Mbytes/sec. and the current ATA HDD in
the market cannot achieve those speeds.

But if you use IDE RAID you can achieve speeds near 100/133 Mbytes/sec.
*sustained*.

regards,
---
Andre M. Varon, SCSA
http://andre.lasaltech.com


_
Philippine Linux Users Group. Web site and archives at http://plug.linux.org.ph
To leave: send "unsubscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To subscribe to the Linux Newbies' List: send "subscribe" in the body to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to