Quitting SCSI

[schmosef]

u is right.

[chaoliang]

My mobo supports two SATA I channels. That can be tight as soon as I have to attach a third disc for data backup. So I thought that maybe I should get a SATA II controller for more HDDs.
But you're right. If the controller will be a burden for the PCI bus, it's better to find another solution. A new mobo is too expensive for me. The one I have is not bad: Asus P4C800e deluxe.
All my ATA discs are SATA I ones.

[LvR]

My mobo supports two SATA I channels. That can be tight as soon as I have to attach a third disc for data backup. So I thought that maybe I should get a SATA II controller for more HDDs.
But you're right. If the controller will be a burden for the PCI bus, it's better to find another solution. A new mobo is too expensive for me. The one I have is not bad: Asus P4C800e deluxe.
All my ATA discs are SATA I ones.

Guess for backup purposes it should be ok to live with a PCI card to give you the extra SATA controller .............

[Wombat]

Realistically - imo if you have stuck to SCSI till now, then slapping a SATA controller on a PCI bus is not going to be the most effective way of entering the SATA market and your satisfaction levels will be low too .................

NCQ and SATA implies a new mobo that has a controller hanging off/out of the Southbridge that understands the new technology by design and are not limited by the PCI bus bandwidth.

But wasn't his SCSI controller limited by PCI bandwidth? Besides, as I've mentioned in other threads, your PCI bus is capable of greater transfer rates than any single hard drive.

[chaoliang]

I was thinking about this point, too. A comparison between SCSI and SATA controllers on PCI bus will be very interesting. Actually there shouldn't be disadvantages if I replace the SCSI controller with a SATA II one.
That said, SATA interfaces on board will of course relieve the PCI bus. On the PCI bus I have only the P650 (maybe later an ATI with passive cooler ) and a TV card.

[Wombat]

Actually, not "of course." Depending on the motherboard chipset, you may well find that the on-board SATA controllers still hang off the SCSI bus.

[Tjalfe]

Actually, not "of course." Depending on the motherboard chipset, you may well find that the on-board SATA controllers still hang off the SCSI bus.

you mean PCI bus.. no?

[LvR]

But wasn't his SCSI controller limited by PCI bandwidth? Besides, as I've mentioned in other threads, your PCI bus is capable of greater transfer rates than any single hard drive.

In theory you are absolutely correct. In practice I have however found with the few PCI SATA controllers seen in customer's machines that they are way more demanding than the SCSI jobs - often to the extent that anything else running off the PCI bus pukes when the SATAs hit a 125M/s burst for a half second or so (never seen the promised 150M/s though!).

I guess if you only gonna run a PCI SATA card and nothing else it shouldn't really matter that much, but often on the older boards some other hw is tied to the PCI as well (audio/ATA/1394/USB etc) - satisfaction is gonna depend a lot on what exactly the particular machine's main purpose in life is.