On Fri, 17 Nov 2000, Marshall, Joshua wrote:
> I hope I'm not opening a can of worms here, but what are the real
> differences these days between IDE and SCSI performance-wise?
>
> I've been told that SCSI can handle multi-user better, but I'm just
> wondering if it's just a myth now with the performance gains that IDE
> has had of late.
The main difference {ignoring speed, which may or may not still hold} is
the number of devices.
Even assuming you put a couple of extra IDE controllers in your machine,
you can get maybe 4 or 6 IDE devices connected to one box.
With a single ultra wide SCSI controller, you can get 15 - and you can run
up to 4 controllers in one machine without running into problems -
although if you need that many you'd usually split them across two PCI
busses.
You can build _much_ bigger drive arrays with SCSI than you can with IDE.
Although, for home use, this is often a moot point. After all, who needs
6000(*) gig on a home machine?
Oh - and those numbers limits apply only to Intel hardware - I've seen
Vax/Alpha boxen with literally thousands of drives hanging off them. Can't
do that with IDE.
DaZZa
* Figure based on 4 Ultra Wide controllers with two SCSI busses per
controller giving a total of 120 drives at 50 gig per drive - all of which
is existing technology.
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug
