• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

WD Raptor gets raped...

Bah! 😛 *waits for Cheetah 15k.4 and Fujitsu MAU*

(edit: /me adds a 😉😉 so GOSHARKS doesn't feel bad 😀)
 
:thumbsup:

The best thing about SATA is the data cable. Granted, the SATA cable is better x 1,000 than either SCSI or IDE cables...but that's the only thing SATA has on SCSI. 😀

And while SATA may have the Price vs. Storage Size factor won hands down, nothing beats having your OS and programs on a 15K rpm SCSI drive and all your data/files on a huge IDE drive.

I :heart: my SCSI drives.
 
Originally posted by: MichaelD

The best thing about SATA is the data cable. Granted, the SATA cable is better x 1,000 than either SCSI or IDE cables...but that's the only thing SATA has on SCSI. 😀
Click to expand...


Remember though in a server environment, a 10-drive RAID array would only need 1 cable (2 if the IO wasn't very random and 320MB/sec became a bottleneck), but with SATA-1 you would need 10 cables. SCSI connectors are also more durable, and there already exists a mature infrastructure--backplanes--to make use of a large number of SCSI drives with no cable at all. Very little support of this kind exists for SATA, though that may change in the future.
 
I was all interested till i read SCSI & Maxtor.

Some of us don't have that kinda money, & most of us know better than to flirt with Maxtor's [lack of] quality 😉
 
Originally posted by: Sivar
Originally posted by: MichaelD

The best thing about SATA is the data cable. Granted, the SATA cable is better x 1,000 than either SCSI or IDE cables...but that's the only thing SATA has on SCSI. 😀
Click to expand...


Remember though in a server environment, a 10-drive RAID array would only need 1 cable (2 if the IO wasn't very random and 320MB/sec became a bottleneck), but with SATA-1 you would need 10 cables. SCSI connectors are also more durable, and there already exists a mature infrastructure--backplanes--to make use of a large number of SCSI drives with no cable at all. Very little support of this kind exists for SATA, though that may change in the future.
Click to expand...

S-ATA backplanes are pretty easy to get hold of these days.
Picked up an S-ATA box at work, 12 drives in a backplane, RAID controller, 128 MB of cache, and two external SCSI connectors, cost around $3.200(well, with todays USD, more like $5.000)+ another $1.200 for 12 250GB drives.
Works wonders for the application in mind, I'd rather have seen an all SCSI box, but since we don't need speed at all, it would be hard to motivate the $1.500+(very very rough guesstimate) it would cost to get 3 TB of SCSI disks.

Anyways, it'll be nice to see the new generation of 10K and 15K drives come out, especially the latter, 73 GB isn't exactly a whole lot these days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top