hachigo

SCSI U160 controller

Recommended Posts

Hello,

I'm giong to be setting up a SCSI Raid array for use in a file server/video editing rig. I've bought 4 Fujitsu MAN3367 10K U160 drives. But I have yet to buy the controller. Here are a bunch of 4-channel controllers that I could get:

HP NetRaid-4M specs

Adaptec 3400S specs

LSI Megaraid 1600 Enterprise specs

As far as I can tell, they are similiar but HP and LSI come with 128mb cache while the Adaptec comes with 64mb and the HP has a 266MHz processor which I THINK is faster than the other two. THe only thing I don't like about the HP is that it only has 2 internal connectors while i think the LSI and Adaptec have 4. So which one would best suit my setup?

The system this is going into will be a dual XEON 2.0GHz socket 603 with a Tyan S2603 motherboard that has 2 64-bit 33MHz PCI slots (unfortunately no 64-bit 66MHz slot).

Anyway, any thoughts of the setup and controller and how I could improve it? By the way, please excuse any stupid statements I made as this is my first time setting up SCSI stuff.

Thanks for any help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will you be using the array for mass storage of video files or other data, to host a database or for quick backups of large chunks of data?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will you be using the array for mass storage of video files or other data, to host a database or for quick backups of large chunks of data?

209095[/snapback]

Numbers 1 & 3 there. I won't be using it for a database.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The HP has a 233MHz processor, not a 266MHz one.

The MegaRAID, if you go to the link you point us to, you will see it has 2 internal connectors.

Spread your drives evenly on all channels. You will max out the bandwidth with the 4 drives when plugged into a 66bit/33MHz PCI slot.

A 128MB cache will be great with 4 drives, more was not always better with slower RAID processors.

You could also be looking at a Mylex/LSI ExtremeRAID 2000 wich is similar to the HP with its 233MHz processor and 32-64-128-256MB cache wether BBU or just DIMM, its caching scheme with software kit 5.20 is great. It too, has two internal and four external SCSI connectors.

There is also the IBM ServeRAID-4H but there is no WinXP support.

So my recommandation is, if you didn't guess, would be to go with the HP or Mylex/LSI

I have tried the MegaRAID Enterprise 1600 but with low STR (Sustained Transfer Rate) drives. It will bog down, limit the throughput of the RAID setup with any newer generation drives of 10K/15K RPM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The HP has a 233MHz processor, not a 266MHz one.

The MegaRAID, if you go to the link you point us to, you will see it has 2 internal connectors.

Spread your drives evenly on all channels. You will max out the bandwidth with the 4 drives when plugged into a 66bit/33MHz PCI slot.

A 128MB cache will be great with 4 drives, more was not always better with slower RAID processors.

You could also be looking at a Mylex/LSI ExtremeRAID 2000 wich is similar to the HP with its 233MHz processor and 32-64-128-256MB cache wether BBU or just DIMM, its caching scheme with software kit 5.20 is great. It too, has two internal and four external SCSI connectors.

There is also the IBM ServeRAID-4H but there is no WinXP support.

So my recommandation is, if you didn't guess, would be to go with the HP or Mylex/LSI

I have tried the MegaRAID Enterprise 1600 but with low STR (Sustained Transfer Rate) drives. It will bog down, limit the throughput of the RAID setup with any newer generation drives of 10K/15K RPM

209099[/snapback]

Okay so here are 2 choices:

HP Netraid-4M with 128mb cache and brand new retail

OR

Mylex ExtremeRaid 2000 with 64mb cache used

both of them around the same price.

Which one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In what instances will the extra cache make a difference?

209168[/snapback]

No LSI/AMI 1600 has four internal connectors. Two internal and four external vhdci. I have owned almost a dozen of the four channel (enterprise 1600's) and maybe fifty of the two channels (Elite 1600's) over the last four years. I know them very well.

Isnt the HP 4m actaully a HP OEM of the AMI enterprise 1600? I know the 2 channel is just the HP OEM of the Elite 1600 AMI series. I assume the 4m is just HP's OEM of the Enterprise 1600.

With those drives you do NOT need a 4ch controller. I hate the adaptecs for performance.

Grab an Elite 1600 WITH BATTERY and 128mb cache on ebay for $100 to $125 bucks.

Yes you can combine the Elite 1600 series with a regular scsi controller also no problems.

I was never real impressed with these controllers raid-5 performance. If you want redundant go raid-1. Actually with the 128mb cache just setting them up as single drives and seperating the I-O across the drives with OS on one, program, on anopther, swapspace/tempfiles on another etc.. will feel very fast.

Get a big ide drive to back to.

Tex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In what instances will the extra cache make a difference?

209168[/snapback]

Isnt the HP 4m actaully a HP OEM of the AMI enterprise 1600? I know the 2 channel is just the HP OEM of the Elite 1600 AMI series. I assume the 4m is just HP's OEM of the Enterprise 1600.

Tex

209198[/snapback]

I think the processor on the HP is different from the 1600.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IBM has nice RAID controllers as well. Any ServeRAID 4 (4L, 4Lx, 4M, ...) will be cool. They're rebranded LSI controllers with IBM specific BIOS, firmware and drivers.

Cache is useful for RAID 5 but not very much, if at all, for RAID 0.

I think younalso don't need a 4-channel controller. Those things typically have 2 external and 2 internal channels so you're as good with a 2-channel thing. I doubt you'll need even that though. Single should be enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The HP has a 233MHz processor, not a 266MHz one.

The MegaRAID, if you go to the link you point us to, you will see it has 2 internal connectors.

Spread your drives evenly on all channels. You will max out the bandwidth with the 4 drives when plugged into a 66bit/33MHz PCI slot.

A 128MB cache will be great with 4 drives, more was not always better with slower RAID processors.

You could also be looking at a Mylex/LSI ExtremeRAID 2000 wich is similar to the HP with its 233MHz processor and 32-64-128-256MB cache wether BBU or just DIMM, its caching scheme with software kit 5.20 is great. It too, has two internal and four external SCSI connectors.

There is also the IBM ServeRAID-4H but there is no WinXP support.

So my recommandation is, if you didn't guess, would be to go with the HP or Mylex/LSI

I have tried the MegaRAID Enterprise 1600 but with low STR (Sustained Transfer Rate) drives. It will bog down, limit the throughput of the RAID setup with any newer generation drives of 10K/15K RPM

Just want to correct that it is possible to run a IBM ServeRAID-4H on WinXP but you have to edit the .inf in the driver setup disk so that the drivers are taken by WinXP. By default still, WinXP installs an old version of drivers for the ServeRAID-4H

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now