Anyone running SCSI ?

[mynx]

It really depends on what you are planning to do.
Cost per mb is important when doing video editing because of the amount needed. Scsi allows 7(15) devices. I personally use both. Ide hdd for capturing and booting and a cdrom for every day use. All other devices are scsi.
Things may change with the new USB 2.0 and 1394b, but that is the future. You can't build a system based on what may come out next month or a year from now. Unless you can put off your projects that long.
USB 2.0 is 480 megabits = 60 megabytes per second.
1394b is 800 megabits = 100 megabytes per second.
SCSI 20,40,80 or 160 megabytes per second.
SCSI 320 is also in the works.
Most people still aren't doing video editing,
esp as much as Doc.
For most people IDE is the best way to go.

[xortam]

Jeesh ... hasn't anybody bothered to read my reference ... the SCSI FAQ?

[Dr Mordrid]

And that's supposed to answer what question?

As for your earlier assertion about IRQ conflicts I've not had that problem in years. IRQ sharing, with properly written drivers for the accessory controller, is a fact of life now. This is especially true in Win2000 & XP.

ex: my Fasttrak TX4 RAID shares TWO IRQ's (TX4 uses dual ASIC's for 4 master channels); one with the display adapter and one with the IEEE-1394 device, and exhibits no problems or performance hit at all.

Dr. Mordrid

[xortam]

"And that's supposed to answer what question?"

Its humour Doc ... some people have a sense of it.

AFA IRQs ... I said "possibly creating unavoidable interrupt conflicts". Many here running Win98 with a G400 are well aware of such problems.

[dZeus]

btw. about SCSI vs. IDE:
I got myself a Seagate Barracuda ATA IV 40GB HDD last wednesday, and installed Win2k on it, with exactly the same software config as on my 3-years-old 4.5GB IBM UltraStar SCSI HDD.

First of all I noticed Barracuda ATA IV is almost completely silent (reason I bought it, so that I'm not bothered by the noise when I'm doing overnight SVCD encodes ), and this fact alone make it worth buying.

However, when I compared it while using programs, I noticed that my SCSI hdd was much more 'responsive' when doing lots of things at the same time on the hdd.... like when virusscanning, burning a cd and webbrowsing at the same time, the webbrowser got very unresponsibe when writing and reading from the disccache (becuase the virusscanning and burning also put a heavy load on the HDD), but when doing the same on the SCSI drive, I barely noticed that the scanning and burning was going on during the webbrowsing... it remains very responsive almost as if it didn't matter how much I stressed the drive with other programs. (though throughput of my SCSI drive sucks because it's so old and has 2.7GB per platter data density compared to 40GB per platter on the Barracuda ATA IV ).

So I'm going to keep the SCSI drive, and put it in a removable drive bay and run win2k off it, and only boot from the Barracuda when I'm going to do a overnight encode (and turn off my SCSI hdd)