A Look At SCSI-Performance: Fujitsu MAJ3364MC U160

[Guest]

In the review of the Fujitsu MAJ3364MC why was a motherboard
with only a standard pci bus was used instead of a 64 bit pci bus to get all the bandwith out of the ultra 160 hard drive

 

[Guest]

Or, why not a really fast drive like the 15,000 rpm Cheetah.
Or, why not use a really heavy performance tester like Simultaneous multi-channel recording with Multi-channel playback at 24/96 om random small audio-files using something like Logic audio? There is a number of suggested standard tests to achieve effective benchmarks on LUG (Logic User Group), Most also tests CPU-performance using plug-in effects, but at least one involves adding audio-track playback using a standard set of files simultaneously recording 8, 16 or 24 tracks to the disk. And that is all about Drive-performance. No IDE-system has yet to come even close to Adaptec 29160N (Yes, 32 bit PCI goes some way too...) and Cheetah X15...
And, NO, I don't think it's unrealistic and uninteresting for the general public.

Best regards
Bo Eriksson
ber@donnwell.se (Work)
snake@sdplus.com (private)

 

[Guest]

I want to get a SCSI drive, so which mobos have a 64 bit pci bus and support DDR?

 

[Guest]

the only ones i know of have a serverworks chip set on them.

you can try www.asus.com.tw www.supermicro.com or

http://support.intel.com/support/motherboards/server/STL2/

as far as i know they are the only ones that sell mobos with

a serverworks chipset. but watch out most of them only have

support agp 2x.

for more info take a look at www.serverworks.com

 

[Guest]

it shouldn't really matter if they used a 32bit pci or 64bit pci slot for these test because the bandwidth of a 32bit pci bus is 133MB/s. a single drive cannot top this bandwidth. however if they were testing a stripped array of devices it would make a difference. Also to go along with what other people are saying i hope there's another review when seagate comes out with their next generation of cheetah's. i think the max data transfer rate is 69MB/s! almost twice that of ibm's ide drive. also seagate's new barracuda drive will transfer data at around 46MB/s and hold 180GB. With true hardware multi-tasking, greater reliability, better MTBF and a host of other features scsi makes a lot of sense for a lot of peole (albeit not gamers). also when tom reviewed the quantum scsi drives a while back he made them sound like revolutionary state of the art drives. Something never seen before to put up against the relatively new ide drives. when in fact seagate's most recent (soon not to be) drives have had nearly the same if not sometimes better specs for over a year. had he (can't say for sure he didn't becuase if haven't been reading the site for that long) reviewed these drives to the ide drives of over a year ago i think the picture would be much different. granted the price performance ratio is still terrible for the scsi drives, but you do get a considerable difference in certain areas of performance and reliability for the extra cost.

 

[Guest]

I couldn't have said it better my self!

Mike