| Click here to select a new forum. |
| Drive options: SCSI or USB 1.1? |
Posted by: Gil on 2009-03-26 19:20:39
Please forgive my SCSI ignorance here. 🙂
It seems that I've maxed out the tiny 2 GB hard drive in my Power Mac 9500. I do have an external USB drive, that only works with 1.1 (OS 9), which transfers at .5 MB/s approx. Would I achieve faster transfers if I used a SCSI hard drive? I did some reading HERE and found that the internal/external SCSI bus can achieve upto 5 MB/s, and even as high as 10MB/s with Fast SCSI. However, 50-pin SCSI drives are harder to find, expensive, and don't come in very large capacities.
Bottom line, what's my best option here for 10-20 gigs of storage?
|
Posted by: porter on 2009-03-26 19:30:41
However, 50-pin SCSI drives are harder to find, expensive, and don't come in very large capacities. Maybe so, but a 68pin to 50pin or an 80pin to 50pin adapter will readily fix that minor inconvenience.
Make sure you use HFS+ on large partitions.
|
Posted by: Unknown_K on 2009-03-26 20:28:19
Best option is a used PATA controller card from LEMswap ($20 or less) and any old IDE drives you happen to have laying around.
|
Posted by: Mac128 on 2009-04-04 11:25:06
It seems that I've maxed out the tiny 2 GB hard drive in my Power Mac 9500. I do have an external USB drive, that only works with 1.1 (OS 9), which transfers at .5 MB/s approx. ... found that the internal/external SCSI bus can achieve upto 5 MB/s, and even as high as 10MB/s with Fast SCSI. Why not simply upgrade to a Firewire/USB PCI Card which can be found relatively inexpensively these days? That will significantly improve your bandwidth over either USB 1.1 or SCSI. In fact, you could get yourself a network drive and use a FAST Ethernet card to get 12 MB/s, though Firewire is much faster and does not require OS X. All of these options give you forward compatibility.
|
Posted by: II2II on 2009-04-04 16:28:51
Just a piece of advice: avoid both SCSI and Firewire. They are dead-ends and will probably end up costing more.
|
Posted by: LCGuy on 2009-04-05 04:08:05
If you can afford it, I'd get a Sonnet SATA card. They're expensive, but you can use standard-issue, modern SATA drives, and the firmware actually emulates a SCSI controller, meaning that its pretty much plug and play.
|
Posted by: Scott Baret on 2009-04-05 16:59:59
I agree with LCGuy on this.
If you really want to stick with just SCSI or 1.1 I will warn you that there are tradeoffs of each. I find USB 1.1 to be painfully slow, even when using flash-based products such as older USB memory keys. However, it is far easier to troubleshoot and configure than SCSI, which is like pulling teeth to say the least. It can be faster than 1.1 from what I've seen but if you are looking for something where you don't have to worry about termination or other issues I'd go with 1.1.
FireWire could be another option; LaCie makes some nice external drives for the bus.
|
Posted by: Bunsen on 2009-04-06 04:32:23
We have a Wiki, you know.
http://68kmla.org/wiki/SCSI_harddisk_replacement_options
USB 2.0 will not work with OS 9.x or below - only USB1.1 speeds.
http://www.sonnettech.com/product/tempo_serial_ata.html
|
Posted by: porter on 2009-04-06 12:10:20
Just a piece of advice: avoid both SCSI and Firewire. They are dead-ends and will probably end up costing more. Strange advice for somebody using a Power Mac 9500.
|
Posted by: Gil on 2009-04-06 13:34:56
http://www.sonnettech.com/product/tempo_serial_ata.html <-- says OS 9 compatible and bootable. Has anyone tested that? I remember contacting Sonnet about the fact that it doesn't list anything older than the B/W G3, and the guy said that they have not tested it in anything older, and cannot guarantee it would work.
|
Posted by: LCGuy on 2009-04-06 17:01:31
Our very own coius and defor have successfully run the Sonnet SATA card on their 9500s.
linky
|
Posted by: John Hokanson Jr. on 2009-05-07 15:08:25
Just a piece of advice: avoid both SCSI and Firewire. They are dead-ends and will probably end up costing more. Firewire is not a dead end in Mac land. I am confused where you're coming from on this one. Competent Firewire enclosures can be had for not much more money than USB 2.0. FW is faster than USB 2.0, and it has a more intelligently designed bus. Plus, you can find peripherals that use both, thus having total compatibility.
SCSI is almost obsolete for external drives, but largely because Firewire and USB 2.0 has pushed it out of that market. It's now mainly a niche product for servers.
To answer the OP's question, I would either add a Firewire card. Or if that's not in your budget, go SCSI. USB 1.1 is painfully slow for data transfer and should only be used for low speed periperals, and maybe the occasional scanner/printer.
- John
|
| 1 |