Trying to build new workstation... SCSI or IDE ??

[dyqith]

Well... what i plan to do is build a computer that can do graphics, programming, and other computer game development programs.

The question is should I go with a SCSI system (Ultra160) or the IDE (ATA/100) ??

Which would be better over all ?

I wanted to get 2 to 3 hard drives, a burner, a dvd-rom/cd-rom, etc...

Thanks for any help,
--dyqith

 

[Modus]

If you need more than four IDE devices, a simple, cheap ATA/100 add-on controller card will do the trick nicely. With such cheap, fast 7200rpm IDE drives available these days, plunking down hundreds of dollars for SCSI just isn't worth it.

The drives themselves cost about two or three times more than similarly-sized IDE drives, and can't possibly deliver a comparable performance boost in line with their added cost. Of course, you also have to factor in the cost of the controller, which is where it really gets ugly if you want something recent. And don't forget cables -- a single 68 pin LVD cable can cost up to $20.

There is rarely a situation where the benefits of SCSI outweigh its enormous added costs. The only place SCSI really shows itself worthwhile is Internet web serving. Even smaller LANs with a dozen or so workstations are better served by an IDE file-server with a lot of RAM to keep everything cached.

Your applications will run beautifully on any current 7200rpm drive. The Quantum LM plus is quite cheap right now, and you could also try the IBM 75GXP.

Modus

 

[Neo_Geo]

A couple years ago I built a computer with SCSI components.... to make a long story short, I wish I would have gone ATA for one major reason: upgradeability.

This may seem a bit backward, but hear me out... At the time I built, I went with SCSI primarily because I wanted a good CD-burner (and SCSI was "cool&quot😉. ATA burners are much more reliable now. Now, I am sort of locked into SCSI. I would like to be able to swap components and make a new computer, but with SCSI, my options are more limited, not to mention more expensive. For instance, I would like to upgrade my hard-drive and give my old one to my parents... NOT... their computer is ATA, along with a mojority of my friends computers.

Today, as Modus said, ATA100/66 or even 33 serves everything except servers perfectly fine. ATA is cheaper, almost the same performance, and keeps your upgrade options more open (in my opinion).

This was not always the case, SCSI used to be the undisputed champ in performance. But, with the rate of advancement in computers today, I think ATA is a good choice.

One last thought.. I am not well versed, but I have heard some tidbits on serial ATA. I would consider holding out if you can until this new standard comes out. I am planning on hanging onto my SCSI system at least until then.

 

[TimeKeeper]

That also depends on how hard you going to run your system.
If simple task, like game, web, and "benchmark", I'd think IDE is adequate. If you doing multi-taksing, heavy software rendering software, graphic, videos, then spend little more.

After all, SCSI is NOT as expensive as you have expected. ( WD Enterprise 10K Ultra160/18.3GB HD runs around $200, and it sure going to out perform IDE RAID ) I do still using ATA100 HD, but mainly for storage purpose.

Tekram 390U3W~ $150 + WD 18GB LVD Ultra160~ $200 = Promise ATA100 Raid + 2 of ATA100 HD for RAID 1 config.

 

[jjsimas]

If you program, you should look into RAID.

I program, and I hate when I lose my work. I use RAID. And RAID is easy.

Hard drives do fail. And the data on the drives is important. Either you make daily backups (and be prepared to repeat all the work you did for that day) or you implement RAID.

RAID IDE is about $350 for 15GB.

RAID SCSI is about $1000 for 15GB.

I would love to go SCSI (a RAID SCSI card can have 128MB cache on board), but for me, the performance difference doesn't justify the cost.

Your data hard drive would operate off the RAID card. The controllers on your motherboard could support your CDROM, DVD, and CDRW and mp3 drive.

Jason

 

[PistachioByAzul]

RAID 0 (striping) is not safer. Infact, you're twice as likely to lose your data as with just one hard drive.

 

[jjsimas]

Duh. The only RAID is not RAID 0. I can get two HDs and an IDE RAID card for $350.

If I run them in RAID 1. Then it is a lot safer, like I said.

Jason

 

[Wah]

the problem with ide is that you can't get the high performance drives (10-15k rpm) that are available only on the scsi platform. the question you need to ask yourself is if you would be willing to spend top dollar for top-of-the-line. I guess thats just the way things go.

to respond to you question, if price isn't an issue, I'd definately go with SCSI. I'm not worried about who i can give my old hard drives to.

 

[borealiss]

jjsimas brings up a good point. how important is your data integrity of the software programs you intend to develop? if it's important, and you're on a budget, i would go ide raid 1. what type of imaging are you doing? if you're doing massive 2d imaging and using photoshop, a fast scsi hard disk will benifit you more than eide raid. the amount of memory photoshop takes is about 3x the image size you will be editing in my experience. also bear in mind that when compiling programs, the object files are written to the hard disk before they are assembled into the final program file, as to my knowledge most compilers link incrementally when compiling huge programs. so hard disk performance will make a difference there, and i think the faster access times to scsi would benefit you. so what will you be doing most, and of those, which is more critical to you? performance or reliability, or if you could afford it, scsi raid would be nice, albeit an ungodly expensive solution.

 

[PistachioByAzul]

But IDE RAID 1 is not comparable to SCSI. Infact, it's slower than regular non-RAID IDE, because data has to be written to the mirror drive as well.

 

[borealiss]

EngineNr9

recommending raid 1 eide comes with the fact that one who uses it values data integrity and importance over speed. that's the sole basis for this recommendation.