• 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.

What's up with SCSI?

joshg

Golden Member
Hey can someone give me the low-down on SCSI? I've always been an IDE type of guy, but heard rumors that SCSI is WAY faster than IDE, how so? Also, I've seen cables that have like 4 or 5 devices on JUST ONE SCSI CHANNEL?!? Do they make SCSI cards for PCI slots that are like those ATA100 cards where you have like two or so internal SCSI channels?

Also, I know that I've seen lotsa SCSI hard drives that spin at 10k RPM and all that, so I know probably the hard drives are faster.. is the data connection to SCSI faster than ATA100? Also, is it best if you have all your crap on SCSI, or just the HD (basically, are SCSI cd-roms fast, too, is what I am asking 🙂 ). Someone please LMK I'm interested in going to SCSI setup but wanna learn about it and see if it's worth it 🙂

Thanks!
- Josh
 
Thanks for the link I'm currently reading as we (or, uh.. I.. 🙂 ) speak, I'll post followup w/ additional questions when I'm done 🙂
 
SCSI can be as slow as 5MB/s or as fast as 160MB/s depending on the controllers, drives and cabling you use. The real advantage of SCSI is that it is much smarter than IDE. It allows for multiple drives to all be talking on the same bus in parallel.

IDE is limited to a single master and slave on a controller, and only one drive can talk at a time. If you have two hard drives as master and slave, it reads from one then stops reading and writes to the other. With SCSI though, you can have multiple devices on 1 bus, so you can have say 7 hard drives all on one chain. You can start a copy from drive 1 to drives 2, 3, 4 and 5, be working on a file on drive 1 save it to drive 6 and have drive 7 be your scratch disk all simultaneously. I wouldn't do that, but you can.

One of the significant reasons that you can do this is because each drive has a scsi controller, so it's able to intelligently handle traffic communication. Making the drives smart also makes the drives considerably more expensive. For $160 you can get a 9.1GB 7200rpm Ultra160 SCSI drive. Compare that to an IBM 40GB 7200 RPM 60GXP ATA/100 drive for the same amount.

The basic setup of a SCSI system would include a PCI scsi host adapter and a single scsi device with a cable running between them. Each scsi device typically has two connectors. To add another drive to the bus, you plug a second cable into the first drive and run it to the second drive. This is called a daisy-chain. There is no master/slave setting, but there are SCSI ID numbers and each device needs a unique number.

To make things complicated, there are many flavors of scsi, just as there is slow IDE up to Ultra ATA/100. In addition, different flavors of scsi can support different amounts of drives on the bus and have different limits on cable length. With SCSI 1, the speed is only 5MB/s and the bus can support eight devices. Eight devices doesn't mean eight drives, the scsi host adapter uses one, so that means seven other things can be connected. SCSI devices can be hard drives, CD-ROM, CDRW, Zip, Tape drives, Zip, heck even electron microscopes. Did I mention that the devices can be external as well as internal?

The fastest current SCSI runs at 160MB/s. To some extent it's possible to mix and match older scsi drives with newer drives, but doing so will typically cause the entire bus to operate at the slowest SCSI device's speed. So if you put a SCSI 1 scanner on the same chain as your Ultra160 devices, all the Ultra160 drives will run at SCSI 1 speed. (It is possible to run older devices on a segment of the bus that won't hinder the faster drives, but that's getting too deep.)

SCSI is most advantageous when high throughput is mission critical. Servers and video production are the most common examples. It's a serious step up from IDE and not for the faint of heart of the light of wallet. I know I've glossed over a lot of details and probably made a few honest errors along the way. This is all off the top of my head. The link above looks good, but it's a bit hard to follow the structure on the framed pages. Another good place to get an overview is Adaptec's SCSI pages. They have some good, if marketing heavy, whitepapers on SCSI.
 


<< The basic setup of a SCSI system would include a PCI scsi host adapter and a single scsi device with a cable running between them. Each scsi device typically has two connectors. To add another drive to the bus, you plug a second cable into the first drive and run it to the second drive. This is called a daisy-chain. >>


Only applies to external devices of which that are no Ultra160 except for external HD arrays.




<< To some extent it's possible to mix and match older scsi drives with newer drives, but doing so will typically cause the entire bus to operate at the slowest SCSI device's speed >>


Hence the advantage of Adaptec Host Adapters - slower devices on the same bus do not slow it down. The adapter knows what speed to talk with each device.

The bottom line that people here seem to forget - 160MBps is the theoretical maximum for the entire bus - NOT each device. Yes, current SCSI drives (10K/15K RPM) have a much faster seek time but the actual throughput is nowhere near 160MBps. You do have a good amount of available bandwidth if you are accessing multiple drives at once. (Raid)

Oh and did no one mention that a 32-bit, 33MHZ PCI SCSI adapter is limited to bandwidth of the PCI bus which is 100MBps? To go faster you are talking about a 64-bit 66MHZ adapter and PCI slot. (Servers or MP system boards.)

 


<<
Only applies to external devices of which that are no Ultra160 except for external HD arrays.
>>



Aye, yer right on that. On internal setup is more like that of an IDE cable but can have more connectors. I spent too much time over the years with external devices. That and I was thinking of ways that scsi was different than IDE.




<<
Hence the advantage of Adaptec Host Adapters - slower devices on the same bus do not slow it down. The adapter knows what speed to talk with each device.
>>



Yep, and I touched on that, but I didn't want to go too far. And the points you make about overall bus speed and theoretical vs practical is welcomed. I could have gone on for pages, but I was merely trying to provide a quick overview of how scsi is different. The PCGuide link is full of good information as well, but it's a bit much to swallow for someone who is only asking how SCSI is different from IDE.
 


<< I could have gone on for pages >>



Agreed. I think alot of people are jumping on the SCSI bandwagon not realizing that in practical terms, they aren't going to see a big difference in everyday use. I've kinda been stuck in the SCSI world because I used to get hand-me-downs from work and once I ended up with DLT external drives, etc., it's kinda hard to get rid of it. I have 3 10K RPM Ultra160 drives, 2 10K Ultra 2 drives and 2 ATA100 7.2K drives and to be honest, I can't really see much difference.

 
Joshg, I forgot to directly answer one of your questions.



<< Also, is it best if you have all your crap on SCSI, or just the HD (basically, are SCSI cd-roms fast, too, is what I am asking ). >>



You can mix-match scsi and ide in the same box. You can also mix-match different scsi implementations in the same box. For example, I have a computer with:

IDE0: 1 hard drive
IDE1: DVD, Zip
SCSI 2 adapter: external devices such as Jaz, scanner, tape drive, and the occaisional other.
Ultra160 adapter: Internal LVD drives.
Firewire: external HD, DV deck
USB: CDRW, floppy

All that on one system.
 
Back
Top