Don't have time right now to do this, but I can be pretty confident of the results:

Bandwidth: PCI bus will be bottleneck assuming sufficiently fast interfaces (U160 / native SATA-150). Expect a draw.
Latency: 15k SCSI is monstrously fast (I have a dual P3 WinXP system with it and am astonished how fast every time I boot), but even at 15k rpm, data has to wait for the disk to rotate, so SSD will win.

dionb wrote on 2022-08-30, 09:56:

Don't have time right now to do this, but I can be pretty confident of the results:

Bandwidth: PCI bus will be bottleneck assuming sufficiently fast interfaces (U160 / native SATA-150). Expect a draw.
Latency: 15k SCSI is monstrously fast (I have a dual P3 WinXP system with it and am astonished how fast every time I boot), but even at 15k rpm, data has to wait for the disk to rotate, so SSD will win.

pretty much the bottleneck of pci is around 90-100mb/s so anything beyond that isn't going to matter. ssd is just so much better unless u enjoy all the noises of a HDD 15k scsi drives are loud af personally i prefer the silence of an ssd.

"modern" SCSI is SAS which is basically SATA anyway

aaron158 wrote on 2022-08-30, 13:51:

... ssd is just so much better unless u enjoy all the noises of a HDD 15k scsi drives are loud af personally i prefer the silence of an ssd.

There are certain SCSI hd-models that are noisy indeed, but if you avoid 5 1/4" full size monsters and other well known noise makers and choose for example the Fujitsu MAT series with 10K instead, you have a nearly silent system even with 6 or 8 drives running.
My old NT 4.0 server has 6 x MAT 3147 and produces virtually no noise (except for case and CPU fans). It´s running everyday in my office since 1998 but I didn´t buy the six 147GB Fujitsus in 1998 due to budget limitations.
Even the late Seagate 15K models were not noisier than standard SATA drives.

Agreed. Late SCSI drives really weren't that loud. That monster of mine had a Quantum Atlas V 10k and a Seagate Cheetah 15k in it. They made less noise - and it was less intrusive too - than a regular 5400rpm IDE drive from that era. I eventually moved the Atlas to another system. The Cheetah is very audible, but that's particularly during spin-up and when seeking, and tbh that adds to the charm. The 7200rpm 1.8GB SCA drive in my SparcStation 20 though- that is the noisiest thing since Concorde was taken out of service. Despite its authenticty I replaced it with another (10k) Cheetah SCA drive. Performance jumped up, noise suddenly wasn't an issue anymore.

aaron158 wrote on 2022-08-30, 13:51:

dionb wrote on 2022-08-30, 09:56:

Don't have time right now to do this, but I can be pretty confident of the results:

Bandwidth: PCI bus will be bottleneck assuming sufficiently fast interfaces (U160 / native SATA-150). Expect a draw.
Latency: 15k SCSI is monstrously fast (I have a dual P3 WinXP system with it and am astonished how fast every time I boot), but even at 15k rpm, data has to wait for the disk to rotate, so SSD will win.

pretty much the bottleneck of pci is around 90-100mb/s so anything beyond that isn't going to matter. ssd is just so much better unless u enjoy all the noises of a HDD 15k scsi drives are loud af personally i prefer the silence of an ssd.

There is also how much cpu usage do these different methods require.

Maybe both maxes out the pci bus but one does it with less cpu usage

maxtherabbit wrote on 2022-08-30, 15:04:

"modern" SCSI is SAS which is basically SATA anyway

Yes but I assume no pci card available for that yes?

There are SAS PCI-X cards and those should work in PCI slots.

Yes, I have a 3ware PCI-X SATA raid and yes this also works in PCI.

Cheers,

Sphere478 wrote on 2022-08-30, 06:58:

they can benchmark against some sata ssds?

yea, i'm going to stop you there.

The comparison against a $20 SSD and even the fastest SCSI raid is like comparing a high school kid vs Usain Bolt.

SCSI is a money pit. This is coming from a guy that LOVES SCSI.

Once you get into the PCI era, there is no reason to use SCSI except for shits and giggles.

I never seen a reason to put SSD into very old systems that do not benefit from them. Socket 7 is fine with old SCSI and IDE drives which just work without issues.

Are we really at the point where IDE drives are hard to find or expensive?

Unknown_K wrote on 2022-08-30, 22:50:

I never seen a reason to put SSD into very old systems that do not benefit from them. Socket 7 is fine with old SCSI and IDE drives which just work without issues.

Are we really at the point where IDE drives are hard to find or expensive?

Working drives at less than 120GB? Yes they are getting hard to find.

The gold standard is CF for DOS, SSD (with IDE adapter) for Win98, and SSHD for WinXP (SATA).

majestyk wrote on 2022-08-30, 20:10:

There are SAS PCI-X cards and those should work in PCI slots.

You have my attention..

Anyone got one?

luckybob wrote on 2022-08-30, 22:31:

yea, i'm going to stop you there. […]
Show full quote

Sphere478 wrote on 2022-08-30, 06:58:

they can benchmark against some sata ssds?

yea, i'm going to stop you there.

The comparison against a $20 SSD and even the fastest SCSI raid is like comparing a high school kid vs Usain Bolt.

SCSI is a money pit. This is coming from a guy that LOVES SCSI.

Once you get into the PCI era, there is no reason to use SCSI except for shits and giggles.

Technically scsi ssd does exist. But I expect what you say is true. I would like to see the benchmark because I am curious all the same though 😀

Update:

I searched ebay and all of these SAS controllers that exist in PCI-X is 3.3v notched. I don't know if the SAS chipset is 5.0v tolerant.

Remember, the consumer motherboards are 5V PCI only, unless one add 3.3v supply PCI mod to the existing *motherboard*.

Cheers,

pentiumspeed wrote on 2022-08-30, 23:22:

Update: […]
Show full quote

Update:

I searched ebay and all of these SAS controllers that exist in PCI-X is 3.3v notched. I don't know if the SAS chipset is 5.0v tolerant.

Remember, the consumer motherboards are 5V PCI only, unless one add 3.3v mod to the existing board.

Cheers,

My understanding is that if it is 3.3v notched, the mod is risky because the I/O is probably 5v

Someone added a 5v notch to one of their cards and it worked on one and blew up another is my understanding if I recall correctly.

Sphere478 wrote on 2022-08-30, 23:27:

pentiumspeed wrote on 2022-08-30, 23:22:

Update: […]
Show full quote

Update:

I searched ebay and all of these SAS controllers that exist in PCI-X is 3.3v notched. I don't know if the SAS chipset is 5.0v tolerant.

Remember, the consumer motherboards are 5V PCI only, unless one add 3.3v mod to the existing board.

Cheers,

My understanding is that if it is 3.3v notched, the mod is risky because the I/O is probably 5v

Someone added a 5v notch to one of their cards and it worked on one and blew up another is my understanding if I recall correctly.

Edited my previous post to clarify on motherboard's 3.3V PCI mod.

Cheers,

pentiumspeed wrote on 2022-08-30, 23:50:

Sphere478 wrote on 2022-08-30, 23:27:

pentiumspeed wrote on 2022-08-30, 23:22:

Update: […]
Show full quote

Update:

I searched ebay and all of these SAS controllers that exist in PCI-X is 3.3v notched. I don't know if the SAS chipset is 5.0v tolerant.

Remember, the consumer motherboards are 5V PCI only, unless one add 3.3v mod to the existing board.

Cheers,

My understanding is that if it is 3.3v notched, the mod is risky because the I/O is probably 5v

Someone added a 5v notch to one of their cards and it worked on one and blew up another is my understanding if I recall correctly.

Edited my previous post to clarify on motherboard's 3.3V PCI mod.

Cheers,

If the card is 3.3v notched then don’t try and force it I mean to say.

Unknown_K wrote on 2022-08-30, 22:50:

I never seen a reason to put SSD into very old systems that do not benefit from them.

It's useful for quieting the system.

Hard drives make noise. SSDs are silent.

I like the clicks of some old hdds but not the whine of others. Ssds don’t upset anyone haha