SCSI, "Raptor" and IDE drives.

[Arrowman]

Gentlemen (& Ladies),
I am not a computer expert, and that is why I am posting this thread, because I value the comments of those that know more than me. I have read a lot of discussion threads comparing SCSI and IDE drives, a lot of which I must admit, I don't fully understand. I live in the real world, I just don't understand all the intracacies of the benchmark tests. All I do know is my old PIII 450 mHz with Ultra wide SCSI was the fastest surfing computer I ever had. I upgraded to a P4 recently and the new motherboard was incompatible with the old HD the dealer fitted an IDE drive saying it was quick for the money and that I wouldn't notice the difference with my limited home usage. He was wrong. Pages render perhaps only seconds slower but over the course of the day those few seconds for EVERY page accumulate. 80-90% of my computer usage is web browsing based.
My question very simply is without buying something I REALLY do not need for home computing usage (I don't need a dedicated server in my bedroom thanks !!!) what's the fastest web browsing machine I can put together? Processor, video card and HD with controllers and any other peripherals you can think of. I just want SPEED. I live in Hong Kong with a 'straight through' dedicated 6Mbps internet connection so my connection isn't an issue..

Paul

 

[John]

XP1800+
256MB DDR
40GB 7200 HDD
Biostar NF2 w/ IGP, S, Lan

That alone is overkill for a web browsing machine........

 

[MDE]

Try an different browser. I like Opera, others like Firefox. That may help to increase the 'snappiness' of browsing.

 

[Sideswipe001]

He HAS a P4 already. I highly doubt an 1800+ would be "faster" at web browsing.

If you want to keep your old HD, you just need to get a SCSI adapter. I am assuming your old motherboard had one built in that your HD used.

You might want to look into that, or getting a Raptor and seeing if it helps. I use 15K SCSI here, and I love it, but it's expensive.

 

[John]

Originally posted by: Sideswipe001
He HAS a P4 already. I highly doubt an 1800+ would be "faster" at web browsing.

If you want to keep your old HD, you just need to get a SCSI adapter. I am assuming your old motherboard had one built in that your HD used.

You might want to look into that, or getting a Raptor and seeing if it helps. I use 15K SCSI here, and I love it, but it's expensive.

I was merely suggesting that his hardware is not the problem. Adding a raptor is not going to "speed up" web browsing.

If anything he needs to look at unnecessary services & tsr's that are currently running.

 

[Monoman]

Originally posted by: John

Originally posted by: Sideswipe001 He HAS a P4 already. I highly doubt an 1800+ would be "faster" at web browsing. If you want to keep your old HD, you just need to get a SCSI adapter. I am assuming your old motherboard had one built in that your HD used. You might want to look into that, or getting a Raptor and seeing if it helps. I use 15K SCSI here, and I love it, but it's expensive.

I was merely suggesting that his hardware is not the problem. Adding a raptor is not going to "speed up" web browsing.

If anything he needs to look at unnecessary services & tsr's that are currently running.

ACTUALLY

it will only increase IE's load time only difference I can tell, I use 15k.3 drives myself

 

[jfall]

put your cache in a ram drive

 

[flexy]

newer IDE HDs with 7200RPM and 8MB are definetly 'fast enough'....and, together with SATA, they make SCSI looking obsolete. It's not the case anymor that SCSI is so much faster than a current IDE HD. My $0.2

a) the dealer installed you some older, crappy HD which *IS* slower than your even older SCSI drive ?
UNLIKELY....but possible...

b) your problems come from somewhere else...different OS, different browser, cache settings etc....

Try different browsers (Mozialla firefox ! Opera ?) first...btw. what kind of HD and what OS you're running ?
What did you have before ?

I can see your problem related to IE...because IE's internet cache (was and still IS) *BROKEN*..in other words it constantly downlloads content off the net which it should not NEED to because you have it local on HD already....i am using Firefox for that reason. And btw. ithink not many people know that...because they have broadband and are fine with the speed...but i am extremely annoyed seeing stuff downloaded all the time which should only come from the local HD cache...

 

[Barnaby W. Füi]

Originally posted by: flexy
newer IDE HDs with 7200RPM and 8MB are definetly 'fast enough'....and, together with SATA, they make SCSI looking obsolete. It's not the case anymor that SCSI is so much faster than a current IDE HD. My $0.2

Heh, MANY (quite knowledgable and experienced) people will disagree with you on that.

 

[addragyn]

^
Word.

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey

Originally posted by: flexy
newer IDE HDs with 7200RPM and 8MB are definetly 'fast enough'....and, together with SATA, they make SCSI looking obsolete. It's not the case anymor that SCSI is so much faster than a current IDE HD. My $0.2

Heh, MANY (quite knowledgable and experienced) people will disagree with you on that.

Indeed, with the exception of the Raptor, IDE/SATA has nothing on current SCSI.

 

[Monoman]

Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey

Originally posted by: flexy newer IDE HDs with 7200RPM and 8MB are definetly 'fast enough'....and, together with SATA, they make SCSI looking obsolete. It's not the case anymor that SCSI is so much faster than a current IDE HD. My $0.2

Heh, MANY (quite knowledgable and experienced) people will disagree with you on that.

lol... when you compair the raptor (top of the line SATA) to a processor based SCSI controller and a MAS 15k drive(top of the line SCSI)... there is no compairson PERIOD. IMO

 

[thorin]

Raptor kicks the butts of all drives listed at StorageReview.com with the exception of the top 2 Ultra320 SCSI drives, it even kicks the Seagate Cheetah 15.3 Ultra320 series.

Here's their full review of the Raptors.

Thorin

 

[Cerb]

*flashes cheatah signal into clouds, waits*

...seriously, try other browsers, and if that doesn't do it, give us the HD model you have (hey, ti could be slow).
If it isn't slow, and everything else is working fine (on a slower PC even, Firefox should be faster than IE, but slower than Opera, FI...and who knows, you could have spyware), you might need a Raptor.

The difference between Raptors andnormal PATA and SATA drives is extreme. The difference (for non-server tasks) between 15k SCSIs and the Raptor is negligible, and you don't need a controller card.

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: thorin
Raptor kicks the butts of all drives listed at StorageReview.com with the exception of the top 2 Ultra320 SCSI drives, it even kicks the Seagate Cheetah 15.3 Ultra320 series.

Here's their full review of the Raptors.

Thorin

Thorin is just as predictable as I am Yeah, nice benchmarks they got there... :evil:

Arrowman, your computer should not need to use the hard drive heavily while browsing the Internet. Maybe you don't have enough RAM, or perhaps there's a problem with the drivers or with your browser. I like SCSI a lot myself, but this doesn't sound like it's the fault of your IDE drive. Assuming you have enough RAM for it (and use Windows2000 or WindowsXP), you might try my instructions on making a small RAMDisk and store your Temporary Internet Files on it.

 

[Arrowman]

Gentleman,
Thank you all for your replies and your sincerity. I will post my exact configuration in a few days, but I have given the computer to a friend to check and I cannot remember the details of all the hardware. I do know the HD is running at 7200 rpm I have 1GB of RAM, it's a P4 2.4 cpu running Windows XP. The configuration shouldn't be slow. As I said I base my 'speed tests' on real world tasks. My benchtests consist of connecting two computers to the internet clearing the cache and downloading web pages simultaneously. The SCSI simply did it far faster than any IDE drive figured computer. Many people say that shouldn't be the case because SCSI drives are no longer as far ahead of IDE drives as they were previously. I'm not rich, but I can stretch to a SCSI drive if it will make a noticeable difference. I am just reluctant to do it if it doesn't. The old SCSI has gone ... in my ignorance I didn't realise that a new controller could have got it running in the new computer. Perhaps the SCSI isn't the be all and end all of fast browsing. I just want to know gents with all your collective knowledge, if there was $1,000,000 up for grabs for the person who could download uncached web pages from the net fastest, what system would you put together to do it if you wanted to beat anything you think the competition would be putting together.

 

[thorin]

Originally posted by: mechBgon

Originally posted by: thorin
Raptor kicks the butts of all drives listed at StorageReview.com with the exception of the top 2 Ultra320 SCSI drives, it even kicks the Seagate Cheetah 15.3 Ultra320 series.

Here's their full review of the Raptors.

Thorin

Thorin is just as predictable as I am Yeah, nice benchmarks they got there... :evil:

Are there some you'd prefer to see. I always find their reviews/stats fair. But if they're missing something I'd gladly jump on the bandwagon to have them update or add more tests.

Thorin

 

[Monoman]

I do know the HD is running at 7200 rpm I have 1GB of RAM, it's a P4 2.4 cpu running Windows XP. The configuration shouldn't be slow. As I said I base my 'speed tests' on real world tasks. My benchtests consist of connecting two computers to the internet clearing the cache and downloading web pages simultaneously. The SCSI simply did it far faster than any IDE drive figured computer. Many people say that shouldn't be the case because SCSI drives are no longer as far ahead of IDE drives as they were previously. I'm not rich, but I can stretch to a SCSI drive if it will make a noticeable difference. I am just reluctant to do it if it doesn't. The old SCSI has gone ... in my ignorance I didn't realise that a new controller could have got it running in the new computer. Perhaps the SCSI isn't the be all and end all of fast browsing. I just want to know gents with all your collective knowledge, if there was $1,000,000 up for grabs for the person who could download uncached web pages from the net fastest, what system would you put together to do it if you wanted to beat anything you think the competition would be putting together.

well, I will say instead of buying a Raptor (74g) I opted for a new 36g 15k.3 with a Tekram U160 controller. I will stay with SCSI becuase benchmarks or not, 15k scsi is faster due to the lacl of ACTUAL cpu usage compaired to IDE or SATA. Like I said before, IMO


now, whats faster than the fastest spindle hard disk? A ram drive. get 2 or 3 gigs of ram and run your programs out of ram. yea, it will be faster

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: thorin

Originally posted by: mechBgon

Originally posted by: thorin
Raptor kicks the butts of all drives listed at StorageReview.com with the exception of the top 2 Ultra320 SCSI drives, it even kicks the Seagate Cheetah 15.3 Ultra320 series.

Here's their full review of the Raptors.

Thorin

Thorin is just as predictable as I am Yeah, nice benchmarks they got there... :evil:

Are there some you'd prefer to see. I always find their reviews/stats fair. But if they're missing something I'd gladly jump on the bandwagon to have them update or add more tests.

Thorin

Yeah, Office2000 Pro Administrative Installation Point construction and patching, a real-world task that I have to do every once in a while. Or some SmileMark 2004. Meaning, does it perform well by subjective measures... does it whip out thumbnails quickly when I open a folder containing lots of big 1600x1200 .BMP files, does it hammer out service packs fast, does it copy files to itself or to another drive quickly, can I still use the computer for something else while it's blasting through a daily antivirus scan here at work? ... the stuff I actually use the computer for, not a scripted fast-forward at a speed I could never do as a human being.

Not an easy request to fill, I know. And I should withold judgement until I get a 74GB Raptor and try it head-to-head in both AIP-building and SmileMark, I suppose. Anyone got $220 they could give me...?

 

[GoSharks]

Originally posted by: MiLLeRBoY
The thing with 10000 RPM and 15000 RPM SCSI drives is that they generally have much lower aerial density than the 7200 RPM IDE drives. I guess you can get SCSI drives for less than what they once cost, but a three year old 10K SCSI drive for $150 is not going to seriously outperform a 160 GB IDE drive. Access times will be faster, but overall sustained transfer rates will probably be faster on the IDE. 80 GB per platter in comparison to 15 GB per platter.

SCSI has it's place in servers and such, and I suppose even high-end workstations. For me, though, I would never spend the extra money on SCSI for a home computer. The high RPM whine is reason enough to avoid them, even if cost isn't.

sustained trasnfer rates do not mean very much when it comes to everyday use.

also, the high rpm whine has been just about eliminated from scsi in the past few drive generations - have you actually heard a 10krpm drive? my seagate 36es is as quiet as most 7200rpm ide drives.

 

[Cerb]

Originally posted by: MiLLeRBoY
Oh, I know all about how SCSI is technically faster at a lot of things, but these days, for general PC use, it's not as big of an issue. The thing with 10000 RPM and 15000 RPM SCSI drives is that they generally have much lower aerial density than the 7200 RPM IDE drives. I guess you can get SCSI drives for less than what they once cost, but a three year old 10K SCSI drive for $150 is not going to seriously outperform a 160 GB IDE drive. Access times will be faster, but overall sustained transfer rates will probably be faster on the IDE. 80 GB per platter in comparison to 15 GB per platter.

Try a new 10k for $150

SCSI has it's place in servers and such, and I suppose even high-end workstations. For me, though, I would never spend the extra money on SCSI for a home computer. The high RPM whine is reason enough to avoid them, even if cost isn't. Not to mention that with SATA starting to offer command queuing, one of SCSI's biggest advantages (split transaction bus) will disappear. Which is of course why Serial Attached SCSI and such are being talked about, right? Something like that, anyway.

I wouldn't spend the money, either. But I *will* spend the money for a 7200.7 SATA and controller that supports native command queuing as soon as they come out. I'm trying to keep ~$200 saved just for that. Until that, SCSI drives and the Raptor are it when it comes to fast access of small pieces of data.

Personally, I'm quite happy with the 7200 RPM IDE drives that are currently available. $150 for a 160 GB drive is much preferable to $150 for a 37 GB SCSI drive. (And similarly, it's preferable to the $125 37 GB WD Raptors.) Maybe not for everyone, but it certainly is for me!

Depends. If you mostly do basic office and web stuff, and don't need the space, a 73GB Raptor isn't so bad (nor 36GB if you can be sure of getting the new ones).