Using 2x160GB IDE HD's.Also have 9GB SCSI HD. Any point in using?

[jboriii]

I'm using 2 IDE 160GB hard drives. I also have a 9.1 GB SCSI HD which
is just sitting around.

Would there be any point in using the SCSI HD as the master drive and
putting the OS on it?
Is it even possible to use IDE and SCSI in the same computer?

thanks in advance
JimBob

 

[Michael Hawes]

I'm using 2 IDE 160GB hard drives. I also have a 9.1 GB SCSI HD which
is just sitting around.

Would there be any point in using the SCSI HD as the master drive and
putting the OS on it?
Is it even possible to use IDE and SCSI in the same computer?

thanks in advance
JimBob

If you have a SCSI card handy, plug it in, connext the 9GB and run
HDTach or similar to see if it is faster than your IDEs.
Mike.

 

[CJT]

I'm using 2 IDE 160GB hard drives. I also have a 9.1 GB SCSI HD which
is just sitting around.

Would there be any point in using the SCSI HD as the master drive and
putting the OS on it?
Is it even possible to use IDE and SCSI in the same computer?

thanks in advance
JimBob

It's certainly possible. I doubt it would be much use. At 9.1 GB,
it's probably getting to be "vintage" so not terribly fast.

 

[Rod Speed]

(e-mail address removed) wrote

I'm using 2 IDE 160GB hard drives. I also have
a 9.1 GB SCSI HD which is just sitting around.

Would there be any point in using the SCSI HD
as the master drive and putting the OS on it?

Nope, WAY past its useby date.

Is it even possible to use IDE and SCSI in the same computer?

Yep.

 

[Arno Wagner]

I'm using 2 IDE 160GB hard drives. I also have a 9.1 GB SCSI HD which
is just sitting around.

Would there be any point in using the SCSI HD as the master drive and
putting the OS on it?
Unlikely.

Is it even possible to use IDE and SCSI in the same computer?

You can mix most interfaces these days.

Arno

 

[Folkert Rienstra]

If you have a SCSI card handy, plug it in, connext the 9GB and run
HDTach or similar to see if it is faster than your IDEs.

And where does HD Tach test random access?

 

[Folkert Rienstra]

It's certainly possible. I doubt it would be much use. At 9.1 GB,
it's probably getting to be "vintage"

so not terribly fast.

But may have great access time if it's 10k rpm. Or 15k even.
Random access performance is 1/10th to 1/50th the sequential performance.
So a slower drive may still beat a faster one when it has (much) better access time
May work fine for XP or W2k or any other OSes that do parallel IO.

 

[Folkert Rienstra]

Unlikely.

Shouldn't you be asking the model number first, babblemouth?

You can mix most interfaces these days.

No kidding? And what exactly do you consider an 'interface'?
So where did it say that you could only use this PCI card, but not that one PCI card?

I don't get: why does no one ever ask if you can use floppies and (IDE) harddrives
and CDrom drives all at once in the same PC? Why would SCSI be an issue.
If you can't mix IDE and SCSI, then where are all those PCs without IDE controllers
where all those SCSI cards that you can buy are supposed to find a place in?

One has been able to use a second harddrive controller in one's PC almost from the
start.

 

[J. Clarke]

I'm using 2 IDE 160GB hard drives. I also have a 9.1 GB SCSI HD which
is just sitting around.

Would there be any point in using the SCSI HD as the master drive and
putting the OS on it?

None that I can think of.

Is it even possible to use IDE and SCSI in the same computer?

Sure. Works fine. If you have both SCSI and IDE boards in the machine you
may have to move them around to get the boot sequence right.

 

[Peter]

I'm using 2 IDE 160GB hard drives. I also have a 9.1 GB SCSI HD which

is just sitting around.

Would there be any point in using the SCSI HD as the master drive and
putting the OS on it?

That depends on many things. How new/fast is your SCSI HD. What SCSI
controller you have? What type and how many applications you plan to
install? What IDE drives you have?

Is it even possible to use IDE and SCSI in the same computer?

Yes.

 

[CJT]

But may have great access time if it's 10k rpm. Or 15k even.
Random access performance is 1/10th to 1/50th the sequential performance.
So a slower drive may still beat a faster one when it has (much) better access time
May work fine for XP or W2k or any other OSes that do parallel IO.

Did anyone make a 10K or 15K 9.1 GB?

 

[CJT]

Did anyone make a 10K or 15K 9.1 GB?

answering my own question, yes they did

so there might be some benefit

the devil will be in the details

 

[Peter]

Did anyone make a 10K or 15K 9.1 GB?

http://www.seagate.com/support/disc/scsi/st39251lw.html

this one is only 10K but not bad:
http://www.fel.fujitsu.com/home/v3__product.asp?pid=213

 

[Jim]

I'm using 2 IDE 160GB hard drives. I also have a 9.1 GB SCSI HD which
is just sitting around.

Would there be any point in using the SCSI HD as the master drive and
putting the OS on it?
Is it even possible to use IDE and SCSI in the same computer?

thanks in advance
JimBob

Since I know nothing about your scsi hard drive other than capacity, nothing
about the scsi controller, and what rate your PC can move data down the ide
bus, hard to say. Guessing its an IBM scsi ultrawide.

Have both an Adaptec scsi controller and Promise controller card working on
one PC here. Both onboard ide busses are functional and working normally as
well.

Another option is to just put the swapfile on the scsi drive, but that is
doubtful to be any improvement performance-wise.

 

[Folkert Rienstra]

None that I can think of.


Sure. Works fine.

If you have both SCSI and IDE boards in the machine you
may have to move them around to get the boot sequence right.

Or just get the bootsequence (in bios setup) right.

 

[Bob Willard]

If you have a SCSI card handy, plug it in, connext the 9GB and run
HDTach or similar to see if it is faster than your IDEs.

And where does HD Tach test random access?

Mike.

[/QUOTE]
HDtach v3 reports random access time as part of the summary data, below the
performance graph.

 

[Folkert Rienstra]

HDtach v3 reports random access time as part of the summary data, below the
performance graph.

So did v2. so obviously that was not what I meant in terms of 'speed'.
You want to know the average random access throughput.

Adaptec's SCSI bench can do that but that may not work for IDE.