Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: SCSI Adapters

  1. #1
    Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Santa Cruz Mountains Bay Area California
    Posts
    34
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    I have an Adaptec 29160, I use it, it works for what I want. A while ago I acquired a couple of SCSI 320 drives. I'm looking for a 320 adapter that is similar to the 160 that I have but many/most of them seem to be raid which I am not interested in. Can anyone give me some key words, model numbers, or whatever that will help me choose an 320 adapter that will do what I want. Basically I just want to hook a couple of 320 drives to a computer. These are 80 pin drives but I have already located some 80 to 68 pin converters. Does anybody have strong opinions about any version of these being better than another.

    It needs to be original PCI. Is that whats called PCI-X now?

    One other thing, 32 bit versus 64 bit. Does that relate to what the motherboard supports? I was planning to test with a 32 bit motherboard (Intel D850EMV2L) and possibly later moving to a 64 bit one. (Asus P5W DH DELUXE or P6X58D Premium)

    I forgot to mention, It needs to have Windows 7 drivers.

  2. #2
    Gold Lounger
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Johnson City, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    3,202
    Thanks
    37
    Thanked 215 Times in 202 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by dennis winter View Post

    I have an Adaptec 29160, I use it, it works for what I want. A while ago I acquired a couple of SCSI 320 drives. I'm looking for a 320 adapter that is similar to the 160 that I have but many/most of them seem to be raid which I am not interested in. Can anyone give me some key words, model numbers, or whatever that will help me choose an 320 adapter that will do what I want. Basically I just want to hook a couple of 320 drives to a computer. These are 80 pin drives but I have already located some 80 to 68 pin converters. Does anybody have strong opinions about any version of these being better than another.

    It needs to be original PCI. Is that whats called PCI-X now?

    One other thing, 32 bit versus 64 bit. Does that relate to what the motherboard supports? I was planning to test with a 32 bit motherboard (Intel D850EMV2L) and possibly later moving to a 64 bit one. (Asus P5W DH DELUXE or P6X58D Premium)

    I forgot to mention, It needs to have Windows 7 drivers.
    Dennis,
    Hello, I'm not at all familiar, with the devices you have mentioned, but will pass along what i do know . I use a Promise SATA 300TX2,and have used a Vantec SATA2 150 to give my PC more internal ports. Suggest that you have a look at Tiger Direct, Directron and NewEgg as they all have a good selection of PCI , PCI1 , and PCI E cards Regards Fred
    PlainFred

    None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free (J. W. Von Goethe)

  3. #3
    WS Lounge VIP
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    8,202
    Thanks
    49
    Thanked 987 Times in 917 Posts
    Your 160 adapter will run the 320 disks, just slower - assuming the same interface.

    cheers, Paul

  4. #4
    Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Santa Cruz Mountains Bay Area California
    Posts
    34
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    I continued to research this after posting my question. I now know that PCI and PCI-X are not the same. Also, the PCI buss is not fast enough to support the 320 speeds that a 320 adapter and hard drive can attain. It looks like PCI-X slots are only on server boards, certainly not on my workstation boards.
    I found a PCIe card for 320, but a number of comments that folks had a hard time making it work. I have not found any other SCSI 320 card that uses other than a PCI-X slot.

    To Paul, thanks, I know they will work on the 160 card, I thought it would be nice to be able to run them at higher speed.
    To Fred, thanks for the response, I have enough SATA connections, I just wanted to use all my SCSI drives.

  5. #5
    New Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    9
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    this is nice to know. When I'd look for an updated adapter for my 19160 (which I like), I was told to do the same thing with the PCI - E Adaptec card. I think what is happening is that the marketplace is looking for profits in the SATA configurations and allowing SCSI to become an enterprise niche. I have a SCSI Iomega zip drive and it is noticeably faster than it's IDE counterparts. Even on a PCI bus, the SCSI drives deliver better performance. But of course, performance is measured based on what the user expects.

  6. #6
    WS Lounge VIP
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    8,202
    Thanks
    49
    Thanked 987 Times in 917 Posts
    SATA and SCSI are effectively the same speed these days, but SATA disks tend to be slower than SCSI (7.5k RPM vs 15k).
    SATA is a cheaper interface because it uses less copper wire and a simpler connector, both of which make it easier to compete in the fierce PC market.
    Desktop PCs inevitably use SATA, servers use SCSI.

    cheers, Paul

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •