Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Dream Machine ( Build your own PC ) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RagTimeBand who wrote (4430)	12/24/1998 5:02:00 PM
From: Zeuspaul	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14778

Several reasons for wanting SCSI. 1) speed 2) I'm worried about having enough IRQ's so I thought that having a SCSI scanner would keep from tying up one IRQ. I have SCSI cards in all of my work and home machines. I also have SCSI scanners. I am not arguing against SCSI. Indeed I believe it is a valuable addition to a machine, particularly useful to hardware junkies. IDE harddrives will perform as well as SCSI harddrives. SCSI will outperform IDE in a heavy multitasking environment...Most standard applications will not benefit. For performance you might consider IDE RAID. Perhaps Dave will give us an update. I would go for the SCSI adapter for the scanner. Onboard SCSI is a good option. You could also use it for harddrives, CDR, tape, JAZ... However I would consider designing a base IDE configuration with an IDE primary drive and an IDE CDROM. The machine will be easier to configure. Sometimes with SCSI base components it is difficult to get a machine up and running. OS installs are a lot more trouble free with IDE devices. There is better driver support in the installation process. You could always add a smaller high performance SCSI harddrive. I don't think you can save an IRQ unless you go completely SCSI and disable the IDE controller. IMO you will benefit more by investing your SCSI harddrive dollars in more RAM. Zeuspaul Sorry about the link. It is not necessarily your machine. I think Minotaur has a slow server or too much info on that page. Someone indicated they are working on speeding it up.