What 50-pin ISA SCSI controller would you recommend for a 486dx-66 computer ?
I need it for a CDROM and maybe two hard drives.
Do you want to boot from the hard disks?
Yes, I don’t want to use any drivers.
wrote:Yes, I don’t want to use any drivers.
I recommend to use a SCSI driver over plain BIOS support.
I've seen that there is a significant performance boost.
You may try an Adaptec AHA-1542C
Nowadays because of the driver support there is no real no-pain alternative to the 1542 🙁
If you have a separate diskette controller, a 1540 does, too.
If you want bus master, get Adaptec 1542CF or 1542CP. If you don't, then get a 1522.
Bustek/buslogic makes a decent alternative to the 1542 series. I think it's called the "542"
An alternative to the 1522 should be made by Future Domain. I think it's "TMC 1680" or something thereabouts.
There are probably other good ones too. I know Compaq SCSI controllers are good, but they might not have them for ISA.
"Will the highways on the internets become more few?" -Gee Dubya
V'Ger XT|Upgraded AT|Ultimate 386|Super VL/EISA 486|SMP VL/EISA Pentium
You have to use an ASPI driver to get CD-ROM support on DOS. DOS has no native support for SCSI CD-ROM drives. The adaptec drivers are still up on their website, however.
"And remember, this fix is only temporary, unless it works." -Red Green
Did they actually make a SCSI floppy drive?
I see some SCSI controllers have support for floppy drives ?
wrote:Did they actually make a SCSI floppy drive?
I see some SCSI controllers have support for floppy drives ?
short answer, no.
There are scsi controllers with a floppy controller built in, like the venerable Adaptec 1542C and I would say that controller is the #1 controller for the masses.
Long answer, scsi>floppy adapters exist, but are only for industrial computers with special hardware.
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems just with potatoes.
I understand that LS120 drives -- which can read standard floppies -- exist in SCSI
Is this too much voodoo?
Long answer, scsi>floppy adapters exist, but are only for industrial computers with special hardware.
You can install them on standard computers with 50 pin SCSI controllers, and they work with standard floppy drives. What special hardware is required?
Also, I think the statement that they are only for industrial computers is not really correct. I am pretty sure they have SCSI floppy drives on RISC workstations.
I remember trying one of those TEAC SCSI->floppy adapters on my XT once. I am pretty sure I got it working with a 1.44MB drive, but the bigger issue was that it required quite a lot of conventional memory to make it work.
"Will the highways on the internets become more few?" -Gee Dubya
V'Ger XT|Upgraded AT|Ultimate 386|Super VL/EISA 486|SMP VL/EISA Pentium
wrote:What 50-pin ISA SCSI controller would you recommend for a 486dx-66 computer ?
I need it for a CDROM and maybe two hard drives.
To my knowledge. Adaptec is the best brand when we are talking about ISA. PCI are a different story, as I see just as many good non-adaptec as I see good adaptec controllers. VLB... Hmmm... I have only tried one single VLB-SCSI controller, and that was a "Bus-Logic-BT-445-SCSI-VLB". That is an awesomme controller, and is recommendable as it can run stable at 40mhz FSB.
Don't eat stuff off a 15 year old never cleaned cpu cooler.
Those cakes make you sick....
My blog: http://to9xct.blogspot.dk
My YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/brostenen
001100 010010 011110 100001 101101 110011
wrote:PCI are a different story, as I see just as many good non-adaptec as I see good adaptec controllers.
I'm a huge fan of SCSI. But honestly if your system has PCI, SCSI should be tossed out the window for SATA. However if you decide to continue using SCSI on PCI, then you can't go wrong with Adpatec here as well. Drivers are universal and included in Winblows.
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems just with potatoes.
wrote:wrote:PCI are a different story, as I see just as many good non-adaptec as I see good adaptec controllers.
I'm a huge fan of SCSI. But honestly if your system has PCI, SCSI should be tossed out the window for SATA. However if you decide to continue using SCSI on PCI, then you can't go wrong with Adpatec here as well. Drivers are universal and included in Winblows.
True. Only using PCI SCSI card in my Pentium-166, in order to use my internal Zip-100-SCSI drive. For HDD and CD-Rom, I am using IDE.
Don't eat stuff off a 15 year old never cleaned cpu cooler.
Those cakes make you sick....
My blog: http://to9xct.blogspot.dk
My YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/brostenen
001100 010010 011110 100001 101101 110011
sata performs better than scsi on newer systems or is it just the ease of use?
i for one always liked the option to have everything on one cable instead of this ide/sata nonsense, although ill admit sata at least is not so wide
wrote:sata performs better than scsi on newer systems or is it just the ease of use?
i for one always liked the option to have everything on one cable instead of this ide/sata nonsense, although ill admit sata at least is not so wide
yes, and yes. Superior in EVERY measurable way. The only 2 reasons to use SCSI in a pci system is because you MUST use it, or you feel like waving your dick around.
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems just with potatoes.
...or you want to build a period-correct high performance Pentium I/II/III system, or are working with PowerMac G3/G4 systems. Starting with P4s, SATA was usually included on the motherboard (although some systems have it bridged to the PATA interface...).
wrote:...or you want to build a period-correct high performance Pentium I/II/III system
that's reason #2...
wrote:or are working with PowerMac G3/G4 systems.
Sata is better, but you have to locate a pci sata card with a mac bios chip. That's whats in my G3. This would be reason #1 though.
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems just with potatoes.
wrote:wrote:sata performs better than scsi on newer systems or is it just the ease of use?
i for one always liked the option to have everything on one cable instead of this ide/sata nonsense, although ill admit sata at least is not so wideyes, and yes. Superior in EVERY measurable way. The only 2 reasons to use SCSI in a pci system is because you MUST use it, or you feel like waving your dick around.
Not waving anything around and it is not a must to use SCSI in my builds. I can easily go for that old 20 mb MFM disk in my 286 system or use IDE-VLB instead of SCSI-VLB in my DX2-80. I just like to use different technologies that I have on hand. SCSI is so awesomme, in regards to the setup and how you install it. And it is faster on ISA than IDE is on ISA, if you use a 286-8/16 a 386sx33/386dx40 or a 486sx25/dx33. That is when we are talking old platter drives.
However, an IDE-VLB with a good CF card will perform better and have no noise. SCSI have nothing to do with saying that mine is bigger, nor that I have to use it in my case. I just like to play with the technology, because it has so much more to it.
Don't eat stuff off a 15 year old never cleaned cpu cooler.
Those cakes make you sick....
My blog: http://to9xct.blogspot.dk
My YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/brostenen
001100 010010 011110 100001 101101 110011
wrote:wrote:...or you want to build a period-correct high performance Pentium I/II/III system
that's reason #2...
Depending on what you want to use it for, in some cases it would not actually be dick-waving (e.g. old-school soft synths or DAWs that won't work on anything newer than Win2k and that you actually want to use as something more than a glorified MIDI player).
