Question for SCSI fans

[KnightPalatine]

I want to add a second HDD to my new rig. I'm thinking of replacing the IDE drive that's there now with two SCSI drives. One would be boot drive/programs, the other storage, video editing, etc. Games could go on either.

Should I get two of the 36.7 GB 15K RPM refurbs from Hypermicro, or would I be better served with a smaller boot drive. Price is the same either way.

Once again, my thanks to all.

 

[Markfw]

Go ahead with the two, but make sure you have fans over the drives. I have four 10k 18 gig drives, and they run HOT ! without cooling they readlly heat the case up, so I put them in an external case with two monster fans (not sure the mm, but taller than a PCI/ISA card, I ripped an old 486 to shreds to store the drives.) , one intake and one exhaust.

 

[beatle]

I don't think SCSI is worth it for storage at all.. For OS/apps/games, I would say yes (if you've got the big $$) but keep your ide drive for storage. I'd buy another ide drive and mirror the existing one for storage.

 

[MichaelD]

I agree with Mark and Beatle. SCSIs run warm-to-hot. Make sure they are either in a cage with a fan, or they have adequate space b/t them to allow for air circulation. While SCSIs are meant to be in a brutal, hot, server-type environment, why punish them if it's not necessary?

Also, SCSI for storage for a home/small business is a waste. It's storage, and GB for GB, SCSI is way more expensive than IDE.

I did exactly what you are planning on doing; OS/Programs on one drive, games on another. With things such as game level loading, it's waaaaaay faster than a single IDE and so far just as fast as two WD SE 120GB drives, striped on a hardware (3Ware7000-2) controller.

The SCSIs drives absolutely stomp all over the IDE Array with multitasking. I can be running a NAV scan on the drive, while editing a 700mb file with Photoshop, surfing and doing other stuff at the same time with almost no slowdown. The IDE array stutters and stammers it's way thru the same test.

 

[mechBgon]

I know the price-per-gigabyte of SCSI is not so great, but I wanted to throw out one of its other ace cards: it's built to run, and run, and run... five years of 24/7/365 server abuse, and that's just its warranted lifespan I won't harp too much on the ability to put 14 drives on one cable since I doubt a home user is going to care, and it's not without its disadvantages either (PCI bus limitations).

Incidentally, if you look up the tech specs on Seagate's ATA and SCSI drives, I think you'll find their thermal footprint is actually very similar... 12 watts for a Cheetah 15k.3 as well as a 7200.7, if I recall correctly (probably varies with number of platters, check if interested). Maybe I'll check later once I get home... gotta run and pay my dial-up bill before my ISP closes, though.

*zooooooom*

 

[MichaelD]

*bows*

Ah, The Master has entered the thread. ^^^

It's HIS FAULT. He's the one that got me hooked on the SCSI Drug...and man...is it GOOOOOOD. Damn Hardware Pushers...the first taste is free...the subsequent fixes will cost you plenty.

mechBgon makes a good point; the warranty/expected usage/lifespan. Not that I'd try, but you probably couldn't kill a SCSI drive if you tried. Warranty replacement costs the manufacturer money. Do you think that warrant that bad boy for 43,800 hours (5 years) of continual, 24/7 service if they didn't darn sure know it was gonna make it? Of course not!!

I just wanted to add this little fact:

I have two new-to-the-market Fujitsu MAS SCSI drives. I have both in the same fan-cooled cage (Antec 1040 case) that my WD SE ATA drives were in. To the touch, they are COOLER than those IDE drives were. I don't know why...I've no idea, actually as to WHY. They just are. They make the same or less noise (don't have my db Meter here with me), but these are fluid bearings. I have two 10K Maxtor ball bearing drives (about 8 years old, at least) in my box at work and they are fairly loud, but only when seeking.

FWIW, if you want a reliable, fast, disk subsystem, SCSI flat out rocks.

 

[beatle]

Mech, I'm not sure what you mean by "thermal footprint." I'm looking at SR's db sorted by net drive temp and all the scsi drives are at the bottom (sorted coolest to hottest). The Cheetah 15k.3 runs 25.1C and the 7200.7 is only 20.1C. That's not a huge difference though. It is a far cry from the Ultrastars and Cheetah X15 which all start @ over 32C. :Q I guess it's important to note WHICH SCSI drive will be used, as temps vary quite a bit.

 

[sharkeeper]

Those SCSI disks will get much hotter in the absence of airflow than any IDE drive out there.

SCSI disks shed heat better in the presence of airflow. This is by design. Some have fins to increase total external surface area.

Cheers!

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: beatle
Mech, I'm not sure what you mean by "thermal footprint." I'm looking at SR's db sorted by net drive temp and all the scsi drives are at the bottom (sorted coolest to hottest). The Cheetah 15k.3 runs 25.1C and the 7200.7 is only 20.1C. That's not a huge difference though. It is a far cry from the Ultrastars and Cheetah X15 which all start @ over 32C. :Q I guess it's important to note WHICH SCSI drive will be used, as temps vary quite a bit.

I mean that in terms of heat generation, they're similar, or those crazy people at Seagate think they are, anyway

[*]Barracuda ATA V specs say 9.5W idle
[*]7200.7 specs say 7.5W idle
[*]Cheetah 15k.3 specs say 10W idle

In the bigger scheme of things, the 3W difference between a pokey 7200.7 and a Cheetah 15k.3 isn't much. I prefer to have direct fan cooling even of my IDE drives (which include a pokey 7200.7 and a pokey-er ATA IV), so I guess it's somewhat of what a person is comfortable with.

Bigger picture: budget-concious people who want to store lots of large media files, which seems to be most of them around here, will never be happy with the cost of SCSI drives per gigabyte, no matter what. To each his own.