Misprice? LSI Logic 32-bit PCI Ultra2 SCSI LVD Host Adapter $27.55

[iamjn]

CDW has the LSI Logic 32-bit PCI Ultra2 SCSI LVD Host Adapter priced at $27.55

The best price I found elsewhere for this was $105. Get it here

 

[gwynethgh]

Hope its a real deal. I got confirmation on my order so we will see.

 

[RideFree]

This is pretty hot if you want or need SCSI and don't need top-of-the-line Ultra (as in ultra-expensive, ultra-fussy, etc.).

 

[render]

$59.00 LSI Logic LSIU160 Single Channel Ultra 160 SCSI Host Adapter

I don't think it's misprice.

 

[RideFree]

Originally posted by: render
$59.00 LSI Logic LSIU160 Single Channel Ultra 160 SCSI Host Adapter

I don't think it's misprice.

SATA has just about killed SCSI.
(But then, Adaptec is set to show off their Serial SCSI this fall.)

 

[Rupster]

excellent - been looking for a decent but cheap scsi card

 

[Doomer]

where SCSI really shines is in the reliability dept. I've been running a couple of 18 gig IBM's for about 6 years now as boot drives in 2 different systems and they have been flawless.

 

[sleefer]

$40.00 LSI Logic LSIU160 Single Channel Ultra 160 SCSI Host Adapter

EDIT: $59 is too much. That $40 is shipped.

 

[degeester]

Thanks, ordered one today.I need a new card for a old external HD and CDRW, Old SCSI controller is not supported in Windows XP.

 

[Colebert]

are all these bootable?

 

[docinthebox]

Originally posted by: Colebert
are all these bootable?

I have the LSIU160 and it works great. Using it with a cheetah 15k.3.

and yes, it's bootable.

 

[xDeLiRiOuSx]

I agree SCSI's are really reliable drives.. However, I've had 3 bad experiences with 80pin SCA's --> 68 pin adapters... My drives fail after a few months.... I never understood the issue, but I think it has to do with the performance of those cheap adapters.

David

 

[draelon]

I don't see how SATA has killed SCSI at all.

SCSI has nearly twice the bandwith (comparing ultra320 to SATA's 150)
SCSI has the ability to put 15 devices on the chain comparted to SATA's ability to put 1 device on the chain.
SCSI drives have faster spindle speeds which result in much lower seek and access times.
Both interfaces support hot swapping and bootable drives.

The only thing SATA has going for it is that it's relatively cheap. SATA will probably end up killing parallel ATA, but it really has no business competing with SCSI. It will be a very long time before you see SATA drives becoming standard in systems where SCSI drives are the norm (like servers)

 

[nugglife4me]

don't know about the performance side of things, but I have to agree on the reliableness of scsi. I have a external enclosure with 2 half height 4.5 gig 68 pin 7200 rpm ultra wide drives that ran for like 5 years 24/7(on a sun sparc station) without EVER having a single lock up or error or bad sector fail, etc. simply amazing and they still spin fine just a bit small and slow (and loud -lol) plus they suck some juice too hehe, anyway they aren't the fastest on boot up but while runnin the multi tasking means good performance no matter whats runnin in the background which is sweet. so basically it takes a bit longer to boot(at least my "old" ones do) but once up you can launch stuff and run stuff with no "lag: like you get on ide drives their performance under multiple app conditions is far superior even using these "old" small hd's. the nature of the protocol and its parrallel architecture and command queing make it "better" for some type of aplications, hence you usually only see this technology in servers which need high reliablility, extended run times(ie 24/7) and usually are performing more than one task at a time or have high "constant" loads on them (like 50% or greater) so homies, lets see you try something like that on you ide drives under 24/7 and 50% load and lemme know what happens

 

[UltraWide]

SCSI is more reliable because the "drives" are built to higher standards which you "pay" for.
SCSI is more of a package which charges for reliability. I think in the future you will see SATA invade a lot of SCSI only niches due to the price advantage and ATA's new Serial nature.

 

[RideFree]

Originally posted by: xDeLiRiOuSx
I agree SCSI's are really reliable drives.. However, I've had 3 bad experiences with 80pin SCA's --> 68 pin adapters... My drives fail after a few months.... I never understood the issue, but I think it has to do with the performance of those cheap adapters.

David

Were any or all of those IBMs?

 

[oddjob303]

Damn it I was going to buy this, but then I saw the Promedias 5.1 on clearance for 200 at COMPUSA now I question if i should sell my old 2.1s or run 7.2's

 

[gwuasg]

suprised no one mentioned SCSI rules for RAID mucho faster than IDE, 6 years ago I had 4 drive RAID that would hit almost 20MB/sec. 4 1G 7200rmp baracudas. (i bet it would have gone faster if I had a UW scsi card. still have 10,000 18.2G western digital makes wana get a few more and raid em, wait there to noisy.

 

[rasputinj]

Good deal, I used this card a while back for a friend of mine's system, I think he paid $70 for it a few months ago.

 

[Zepper]

CDW Deal is Dead.

 

[ReiAyanami]

now $71.90, so it was a misprice?