This will never be settled! Do you use an all SCSI or all IDE based sytem and why?

[CQuinn]

Pariah, I read it all the way thru, as would anyone who is interested in
whether this discussion is really identifying the relevant differences between
IDE and SCSI subsystems. It has drifted in parts, but is still topical;
if for nothing else, I think it is helping Storagereview recognize areas
of their site that could use a little clarification

Budman, note what the title of this thread was changed to...
This discussion stopped being about the poll at about the 300th post, when
it became apparent that the majority of people choosing IDE had never
used a SCSI based system to form a subjective comparision.

While most new readers will find a problem catching up, those who have followed
this thread from the beginning are probably just jumping to the last page to
see if any new points have been made or addressed. The fact that it
(for the most part) has not degenerated into a flame-fest is the best sign
that there is still relevance in the discussion.

I know that I am planning on upgrading my storage in the future, and, having the
ability to chose either interface, this conversation is valuable in helping me
to define what needs I have for such an upgrade, and how they might best be met
by one type or the other.

 

[Modus]

Fredrick,

So we can sum up like this:

Buying an IDE setup is prudent if you seek maximum value from a practical purchase, while buying a SCSI setup is reasonable if you seek maximum performance within a specific budget, or if you require a certain SCSI feature.

Fair enough?

Modus

 

[Pariah]

I would agree with that totally modus.

 

[Sword]

Buying an IDE setup is prudent if you seek maximum value from a practical purchase, while buying a SCSI setup is reasonable if you seek maximum performance within a specific budget, or if you require a certain SCSI feature.

I perfectly agree with that !

And I would only add that a full SCSI is so fast that you almost regret it....

I have a work computer with SCSI that is very fast for loading apps, computing data and 3D modeling/CAD and I have a gaming computer with a IDE 5400rpm 8.4 Go (look at my rigs).

When I play with both computer at Quake III arena, for example, my gaming machine is very slow when it is time to enter the game but is so much faster than the SCSI machine in terms of fps (and the quality is not so different...). So it brings me to regret the SCSI setup because I cant afford another one ...

But, I have to say that a IDE raid setup with ata66 is not far behind a U2W setup (not raid, of course). So, I would not know what to choose for a CAD workstation....In fact, I would choose SCSI because it is more reliable but I would like to test both configuration to see the real differences. BTW, I compare ata66 and U2W because they are the cheapest solution of both world for now.

Anyway, all this discussion show 1 thing :

Look for your personnal needs, search for the potential bottleneck in particular apps and try to remove bottleneck without spending too much money.

 

[Sir Fredrick]

Modus, sounds fair.

 

[Radboy]

We're witnessing history in the making with Modus' last post. He usually never gives an inch, and typically fights to the death.

I liked Quinn's post .. especially where he says, ". The fact that it (for the most part) has not degenerated into a flame-fest is the best sign that there is still relevance in the discussion."

SCSI drives are not cheap, but they're no longer prohibitively expensive ($195) like they were a few years ago. If you calculate their cost per GB ratio, and compare it with that of IDE drives, you'll see that SCSI drives offer much less space per gig.

The thing that takes the sting out of a SCSI drive's cost/gig ratio is that you don't need/want SCSI gigs to meet your basic storage needs. SCSI's bang-for-the-buck is maximized by using it run the OS, apps & swap/page file .. 9 gigs is more than enuf space for that. Keep your IDE drive(s) for cheap mass storage.

It doesn't have to be SCSI vs IDE .. as both types of drives & interfaces will peacefully cooperate in the same system. Using each type of drive for what it does best allows the user to harness the best of both (storage) worlds.

Most of the people who frequent hardware forums (like this one) .. who are interested in maximizing their system's perf .. will appreciate what an enterprise class SCSI boot drive (& the SCSI interface) has to offer. And that's where SCSI drives really shine - when you drop one in your system. Benchmarks may give you numbers to look at, but SCSI's real-life application is what matters. SCSI delivers Wow factor.

If I were selling SCSI drives, I'd market them, "The performance of Porsche, with the reliability of Mercedes, for the price of a gfx card."

 

[Modus]

Radboy,

<< We're witnessing history in the making with Modus' last post. He usually never gives an inch, and typically fights to the death. >>

No, I've been known to bend a little here and there. Besides, the agreement we have now took compromise from both sides. I have no problem with a fair compromise to end a tiresome debate, so long as the conclusion is true and motivates people toward a sensible course.

Ladies and gentlemen, we have a consensus!



Modus

 

[Radboy]

Someone should archive &amp; link this thread so we don't have to do it again.

 

[AdamK47]

OK... Now that we have a consensus can it end now? Please!!!

 

[Sir Fredrick]

Yes, finally. And only 46 posts away from 666

edit:
And since we are concluding, here is storagereviews own conclusion on the topic (not too far from ours, I must say):

The final, real bottom line is: if you want it cheap and simple with good performance, use IDE/ATA. If you want maximum performance and flexibility and have the money to pay for it, use SCSI.

 

[KameLeon]

I gotta leave my fingerprints in this one!
Besides, I'm all for IDE, baby! SCSI isn't worth the money for a home user. IMHO!

 

[CQuinn]

To help wrap this up on a high note, I will borrow a post made by Tin Mad Dog
in this StorageReview Thread

Note: This is not meant as a swipe at IDE supporters, it was totally tongue-in-cheek
and I hope enjoyable by all.

======

You've got that SCSI feeling...
Tin Mad Dog (SR Veteran)(Date Posted: 12-15-2000)

Sung the to tune &quot;You've lost that loving feeling&quot; By the Righteous Brothers (with a line added under artistic license #45992)


I never close my eyes anymore when I scan your disks,
And there's no zippiness like before in your actuatortips,
My system's starting to stutter, and baby, baby I shudder,

You've lost that SCSI feeling,
Whooooah that smooth multitasking,
My IDE system's reeling,
Now it's gone, gone, gone, whoooooah.

Now there's no more smooth in your disks when I access you,
My disk subsystem no longer supports the many things, I doooooo...
It makes me just feel like crying...
My new disk, my 75gxp's dying!

You've lost that SCSI feeling,
Whooooah that reliable reading,
My ATA keeps on churning,
(the coasters I keep on burning)
Now it's gone, gone, gone, whoooooah.

Baby, Baby, I get down on my knees for you,
(Since I swapped my disks out, I keep my case unscrewed.... yeah),
We had performance, seeks, throughput you don't find everyday.
So don't, don't, don't, don't, let it slip away.
Baby, (Baby) Baby, (Baby) I'm begging you please (please) , please, (please)...
I need more disks,
I need more disks,
no more master and slaves,
(bring it on back)
I need faster saves,
(bring it on back)

Bring back that SCSI feeling!
IDE keeps cycle stealing,
my cheap disk, performance ceiling,
Oh, it's gone, gone, gone, and IDE was so wrong, whoooooah.

Bring back that SCSI feeling,
slick as glass multiple tasking,
no IDE performance ceiling,
Now you're gone, gone, gone, whoooooah.

 

[Radboy]

Speaking of SR, and Mad Dog, here's a recent thread asking for advice on upgrading to P3 or going SCSI.

 

[DoOLiE11]

scsi for my cdrom and burners

and ide for my raid

 

[Pariah]

You posted that link on page 6 Radboy. Damn, you know a thread is too long when one person is posting a link multiple times to one site in seperate messages...