Transfer from SCSI to IDE - better performance from the ID..

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

I've had two 18gb IBM SCSI disks (DNES 318350) running off a 29160 for a
couple of years now.

I managed to get hold of a couple od Western Digital WD400 IDE drives for
free (40gb). As my SCSI drives were getting full, I decided to tranfer my
operating system to the IDE drives.

What I didn't expect was a considerable INCREASE in performance. Disk access
is much faster than witht the SCSI drives.

Clive

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

Clive wrote:
> I've had two 18gb IBM SCSI disks (DNES 318350) running off a 29160 for a
> couple of years now.
>
> I managed to get hold of a couple od Western Digital WD400 IDE drives for
> free (40gb). As my SCSI drives were getting full, I decided to tranfer my
> operating system to the IDE drives.
>
> What I didn't expect was a considerable INCREASE in performance. Disk access
> is much faster than witht the SCSI drives.
>
> Clive
>
>
But, IDE drives only permit serial read/write whilst scsi can do
multi-read/writes! AFAIK.

My two Seagate ST118202LC 18.2 Gb 10,000 rpm drives are a whole lot
faster in access than my 40Gb 7200 rpm IDE WD drive, on a Duron 1.3Ghz
system, serving lots of Linux distros out on Limewire.

The spec. is that 80mb per second can be accessed on the SCSI drives, as
they are on 68 pin adapters, from the 80 pin SCA output of the drives,
with access times of 4 to 6 ms.

I am interested as to what SCSI format you used, and the drive speeds.
If they are 50 pin scsi 1, access speed and time could match IDE specs,
for serial data transfers. In other words, something seems fishy with
your scsi setup.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

"Patrick" <pberry26@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ry6ic.482485$B81.8119881@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
> Clive wrote:
> > I've had two 18gb IBM SCSI disks (DNES 318350) running off a 29160 for a
> > couple of years now.
> >
> > I managed to get hold of a couple od Western Digital WD400 IDE drives
for
> > free (40gb). As my SCSI drives were getting full, I decided to tranfer
my
> > operating system to the IDE drives.
> >
> > What I didn't expect was a considerable INCREASE in performance. Disk
access
> > is much faster than witht the SCSI drives.
> >
> > Clive
> >
> >
> But, IDE drives only permit serial read/write whilst scsi can do
> multi-read/writes! AFAIK.
>
> My two Seagate ST118202LC 18.2 Gb 10,000 rpm drives are a whole lot
> faster in access than my 40Gb 7200 rpm IDE WD drive, on a Duron 1.3Ghz
> system, serving lots of Linux distros out on Limewire.
>
> The spec. is that 80mb per second can be accessed on the SCSI drives, as
> they are on 68 pin adapters, from the 80 pin SCA output of the drives,
> with access times of 4 to 6 ms.
>
> I am interested as to what SCSI format you used, and the drive speeds.
> If they are 50 pin scsi 1, access speed and time could match IDE specs,
> for serial data transfers. In other words, something seems fishy with
> your scsi setup.
>
The IBM drives are 68 pin and I believe they spin at 7200rpm, that's about
all I know about them. The are connected to a Adaptec 29160, correctly
terminated.

They only seem to have slowed a lot as they get near to capacity (full).

My thoughts were that they SHOULD be faster than the IDE drives, but in
everyday use the IDE drives are definitely faster than my 'ex' SCSI setup

Clive

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

"Clive" <someone@NOTHANKS.com> wrote...
> I've had two 18gb IBM SCSI disks (DNES 318350) running off a 29160 for a
> couple of years now.
>
> I managed to get hold of a couple od Western Digital WD400 IDE drives for
> free (40gb). As my SCSI drives were getting full, I decided to tranfer my
> operating system to the IDE drives.
>
> What I didn't expect was a considerable INCREASE in performance. Disk access
> is much faster than witht the SCSI drives.

What you are seeing is likely as much a function of a clean OS installation,
non-fragmented file system, and sufficient open space on the HDs, as it is the
raw HD specs/performance.

When you get the time, disconnect the IDE drives, repartition and format the
SCSI HDs, and re-install the OS and apps on the SCSI drives. Try to compare
performance with the equivalent new OS installations.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 10:22:32 GMT, "Clive" <someone@NOTHANKS.com> wrote:

>I've had two 18gb IBM SCSI disks (DNES 318350) running off a 29160 for a
>couple of years now.
>
>I managed to get hold of a couple od Western Digital WD400 IDE drives for
>free (40gb). As my SCSI drives were getting full, I decided to tranfer my
>operating system to the IDE drives.
>
>What I didn't expect was a considerable INCREASE in performance. Disk access
>is much faster than witht the SCSI drives.
>
>Clive
>

Why would you not expect that a newer IDE drive is faster?
Your drive is rougly circa-'99, *only* 7200 RPM... darn near anything new
enough to be worthwhile swapping into a system will be faster. Don't buy
into the myth that SCSI = performance, SCSI is a better technology but
without the need for concurrent read/writes as in a typical "PC" use it
ultimately depends most on the specific drives, how new they are to the
extent that this increases density and rotational speed.