SATA over SCSI ?

badtzbadtz
Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Greetings,



I was wondering if there's any significant advantages of SCSI over SATA?



It seems that SATA has really closed the gap between the two, and now there's very little difference between comparable 10k SATA and 10k SCSI drives. But how about against 15k SCSI drives?



How's the sustained transfer rate between SATA/SCSI in the real world?





Any input?

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 1
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,425member
    While PATA/SATA drives are large and inexpensive the fundamental weakness of the spec is CPU

    utilization. ATA drives rely on the CPU to handle many I/O functions and read/writes. This keeps

    the drives cheaper because the spec leverages the CPU for help.



    SCSI is expensive but far more

    autonomous. The CPU sends the I/O or read/write commands to a SCSI setup and for the most part the

    SCSI protocol can hand a majority of the transaction without much CPU involvement. With the current

    large RAID systems you have a nice hybrid setup. You connect the box via FC or SCSI to reap the

    rewards in CPU util. The RAID box reaps the reward of low cost ATA drives and handles these drives I/O

    requests using it's own built in processor.
Sign In or Register to comment.