Sign in to follow this  
tvaldez

Scsi or Serial Scsi (SAS)

Recommended Posts

Im new here and in the middle on my next upgrade. I was pretty sure I wanted to get 2 73g (raid-0) ultra320 drives with either a pci-x & or pci-Express raid card. That was until I was told to look into SAS. I am now more confused. I am looking for the best performance. I just dont want to go scsi and then sas takes over and feel the need to upgrade again. And I apoligize for my long-windedness.

My new rig for the most part is listed here.

https://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/Wishli...tTitle=New+PC+2

Just to ad, I am not into parity or redundancy (so i went for raid 0) as I general dont keep to many files on my pc. I use the pc for gaming, ripping, burning, playing dvds, and playing solitare at blazing speeds. I just want the fastest thing on the planet that will hold me down for a few years.

Option 1: Go Scsi 2 drives in raid 0 with a lsi card I was thinking these:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?...N82E16816118027

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductCompa...N82E16822116010

Option 2 Go SAS Scsi 2 drives in raid 0

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductCompa...N82E16816118035

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductCompa...N82E16822116016

In either case, these items are just suggestions as I know little about them, just looking at specs really.

The other issue would be.

In overall pc peformance and based on my usage, would I benefit more from using the pci-express slot for my raid card OR getting a second vid card for the pci-express slot and using a pci-x raid card for the scsi?

I was told by another reliable source to go for the quad sli and drop the raid into pci-x, but the more opinions the better.

Thanks in advance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about just getting a 150Gig Raptor ? That's as fast as all the 15K SCSI drives for single-user tasks. And RAID 0 isn't really going to help any, and just double your chances of losing data if a HD fails.

And PCI-X is pretty much only on server motherboards, and won't work in the MB that is in your list. PCI-Express == PCI-e

If you really want SCSI, why not a regular U160 SCSI controller with a 73Gig 15K HD (Atlas 15KII or Fujitsu MAU) with a large ATA drive for storage?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about just getting a doorstop...err, Raptor? It's not quite the same thing, and certainly not nearly as reliable. I'm far more worried about why the poster wants to use RAID 0 than whether it's SCSI or ATA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really? that is the first time I have heard that. I have searched the various forums forever and almost every other post on that particular topic (single vs. 2 in raid 0) I have read say 2 drives in 0 are better than 1 single of same specs. Why I dont know. Again im not sure because I based all my knowlegde by reading the internet, but even a family member of mine that installs/designs workstations/server for companies swears by it. Again Im not saying that you are wrong, but I have never read that b4.

But then again it doesn't really matter thats not the point of my post. Its just really about the scsi vs. sas.

But thx for the heads up on the incompatiblity with the board on pci-x. I will research that and I guess that leaves me finding a pci-e card or maybe downgrading it to a lesser slot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no performance difference at this point. A U320 RAID-0 and a SAS RAID-0 with identical drives (different interface, of course) will perform identically, all things being equal.

However, SCSI is a dead standard with no future development. SAS is the future, and SAS controllers WILL run SATA drives. You can mix-and-match SAS and SATA on the same controller. SATA controllers will not run SAS drives however -- so keep that in mind.

The P2P connection that SAS uses has considerably more flexibility and performance potential, but that has no effect on a desktop machine. It's real implications are server-specific.

SCSI/SAS drives are great, but you'll actually get better performance and near-equal reliability using twin SATA 150G Raptors than by using ANY 36-73GB 15k SCSI drives, plus you'll get at least double the capacity, keep the same data near the outer (faster) portions of the platter longer.

Don't get me wrong, I use SCSI and SAS is most of my machines, but it's generally a waste of time and money and is certainly not worthwhile from a performance point-of-view.

Also, RAID-0 will not affect desktop performance. A single drive will perform as well (if not better, under some conditions) as two or more of the same drives striped for the average desktop. Please note that I'm not talking about uncompressed HD editing or such niche tasks, but for standard desktop/gaming use RAID-0 is, generally speaking, a complete waste.

Brendan.

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
Sign in to follow this