Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 23:06:47 -0700 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: David Scheidt <dscheidt@enteract.com>, Jay Nelson <noslenj@swbell.net> Cc: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: dual 400 -> dual 600 worth it? Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.19991210230453.046806e0@localhost> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96.991210233342.61393A-100000@shell-1.enteract. com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9912102024270.306-100000@acp.swbell.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 10:45 PM 12/10/1999 , David Scheidt wrote: >Under light to moderate IO loads, the disk interface isn't likely to be the >overall limiting factor on the machine. You certainly save some money by >going with IDE. On a low-end box, perhaps as much as 15 or 20% of the total >cost of the machine. Once you move away from the bottom end, or you want >more than a couple disks, SCSI looks much better. Why wouldn't IDE retain an advantage -- so long as you put the disks on separate controllers to avoid having one block another? (I like SCSI too, but given the realities -- or unrealities -- of hard drive pricing I'm always looking to milk more performance out of IDE drives when I can.) --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.2.0.58.19991210230453.046806e0>