Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
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>