If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
are SATA drives cooler to the touch than IDE?
I need to buy some drives for a company server, to be used in a RAID
configuration. I'm used to buying SCSI drives, because I love 1) that they feel cool to the touch when running and 2) they have a high "mean time between failure" number (MTBF). I just hate the price of SCSI drives and this is for a small business. Now, I see that SATA drives have a good MTBF number comparable to SCSI. So I'm thinking of buying the Maxtor 9 or 10 series SATA drives or the WD Raptors that spin at 10k. They all have MTBF numbers like SCSI drives but can someone tell me how cool or hot they are to the touch? If an IDE (regular ATA) drive runs warm/hot, and a SCSI drive in the same enclosure runs cool, where does SATA fall? Does anyone know from experience touching these drives while they're running? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
AFN wrote:
I need to buy some drives for a company server, to be used in a RAID configuration. I'm used to buying SCSI drives, because I love 1) that they feel cool to the touch when running and 2) they have a high "mean time between failure" number (MTBF). I just hate the price of SCSI drives and this is for a small business. Now, I see that SATA drives have a good MTBF number comparable to SCSI. So I'm thinking of buying the Maxtor 9 or 10 series SATA drives or the WD Raptors that spin at 10k. They all have MTBF numbers like SCSI drives but can someone tell me how cool or hot they are to the touch? If an IDE (regular ATA) drive runs warm/hot, and a SCSI drive in the same enclosure runs cool, where does SATA fall? Does anyone know from experience touching these drives while they're running? They might be the most reliable drives on the planet these days, but once bitten...and these days I steer clear of Crapster - I've yet to see one last longer than four or five months. I have three WD Raptors in my system and they are surprisingly cool - in fact I'd go as far as to say cold and relatively quiet. -- My great-grandfather was born and raised in Elgin - did he eventually lose his marbles? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Miss Perspicacia Tick" wrote in message ... AFN wrote: I need to buy some drives for a company server, to be used in a RAID configuration. I'm used to buying SCSI drives, because I love 1) that they feel cool to the touch when running and 2) they have a high "mean time between failure" number (MTBF). I just hate the price of SCSI drives and this is for a small business. Now, I see that SATA drives have a good MTBF number comparable to SCSI. So I'm thinking of buying the Maxtor 9 or 10 series SATA drives or the WD Raptors that spin at 10k. They all have MTBF numbers like SCSI drives but can someone tell me how cool or hot they are to the touch? If an IDE (regular ATA) drive runs warm/hot, and a SCSI drive in the same enclosure runs cool, where does SATA fall? Does anyone know from experience touching these drives while they're running? They might be the most reliable drives on the planet these days, but once bitten...and these days I steer clear of Crapster - I've yet to see one last longer than four or five months. I have three WD Raptors in my system and they are surprisingly cool - in fact I'd go as far as to say cold and relatively quiet. -- My great-grandfather was born and raised in Elgin - did he eventually lose his marbles? Thanks for the reply. Is there anything unusual about the Raptors in your case that might have made them crash (like you live in humid Hawaii or a hot desert without A/C)? Could you tell me how many Raptors you've had and how many of those have had true mechanical (really not working) problems? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
AFN wrote:
"Miss Perspicacia Tick" wrote in message ... AFN wrote: I need to buy some drives for a company server, to be used in a RAID configuration. I'm used to buying SCSI drives, because I love 1) that they feel cool to the touch when running and 2) they have a high "mean time between failure" number (MTBF). I just hate the price of SCSI drives and this is for a small business. Now, I see that SATA drives have a good MTBF number comparable to SCSI. So I'm thinking of buying the Maxtor 9 or 10 series SATA drives or the WD Raptors that spin at 10k. They all have MTBF numbers like SCSI drives but can someone tell me how cool or hot they are to the touch? If an IDE (regular ATA) drive runs warm/hot, and a SCSI drive in the same enclosure runs cool, where does SATA fall? Does anyone know from experience touching these drives while they're running? They might be the most reliable drives on the planet these days, but once bitten...and these days I steer clear of Crapster - I've yet to see one last longer than four or five months. I have three WD Raptors in my system and they are surprisingly cool - in fact I'd go as far as to say cold and relatively quiet. -- My great-grandfather was born and raised in Elgin - did he eventually lose his marbles? Thanks for the reply. Is there anything unusual about the Raptors in your case that might have made them crash (like you live in humid Hawaii or a hot desert without A/C)? Could you tell me how many Raptors you've had and how many of those have had true mechanical (really not working) problems? Hot and humid?! Here in Blighty?! Naw - stable 22°C all year round. How many have I had? Three - the three I have now. It's Maxtors I hate. Most unreliable drives in the known Universe. -- My great-grandfather was born and raised in Elgin - did he eventually lose his marbles? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 17:51:17 +0000, AFN wrote:
I need to buy some drives for a company server, to be used in a RAID configuration. I'm used to buying SCSI drives, because I love 1) that they feel cool to the touch when running and 2) they have a high "mean time between failure" number (MTBF). I just hate the price of SCSI drives and this is for a small business. Now, I see that SATA drives have a good MTBF number comparable to SCSI. So I'm thinking of buying the Maxtor 9 or 10 series SATA drives or the WD Raptors that spin at 10k. They all have MTBF numbers like SCSI drives but can someone tell me how cool or hot they are to the touch? If an IDE (regular ATA) drive runs warm/hot, and a SCSI drive in the same enclosure runs cool, where does SATA fall? Does anyone know from experience touching these drives while they're running? SATA and ATA drives are exactly the same drives except for the interface so they will run at the same temperature. I'd suggest using Seagate drives, I've found them to be very reliable. Avoid Maxtor, they are the least reliable drives on the planet. The highest performance SATA 7200RPM drives right now are the Hitachi (formerly IBM) drives. IBM had a terrible reliablity problem a couple of years ago, I don't know how they are doing now. The best place to look for informantion on drive performance, including temperature and noise, is at http://www.storagereview.com. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"General Schvantzkoph" wrote in message news On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 17:51:17 +0000, AFN wrote: I need to buy some drives for a company server, to be used in a RAID configuration. I'm used to buying SCSI drives, because I love 1) that they feel cool to the touch when running and 2) they have a high "mean time between failure" number (MTBF). I just hate the price of SCSI drives and this is for a small business. Now, I see that SATA drives have a good MTBF number comparable to SCSI. So I'm thinking of buying the Maxtor 9 or 10 series SATA drives or the WD Raptors that spin at 10k. They all have MTBF numbers like SCSI drives but can someone tell me how cool or hot they are to the touch? If an IDE (regular ATA) drive runs warm/hot, and a SCSI drive in the same enclosure runs cool, where does SATA fall? Does anyone know from experience touching these drives while they're running? SATA and ATA drives are exactly the same drives except for the interface so they will run at the same temperature. I'd suggest using Seagate drives, I've found them to be very reliable. Avoid Maxtor, they are the least reliable drives on the planet. The highest performance SATA 7200RPM drives right now are the Hitachi (formerly IBM) drives. IBM had a terrible reliablity problem a couple of years ago, I don't know how they are doing now. The best place to look for informantion on drive performance, including temperature and noise, is at http://www.storagereview.com. I don't believe that the SATA drives are the same as regular IDE/ATA. They boast double the MTBF numbers, comparable to SCSI. I'm not an expert, and I'm inviting debate, but I believe you're wrong to say they are the same except for the interface. Surely some components inside must be different if the MTBF numbers is double (and comparable to SCSI). |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 23:48:29 GMT, "AFN"
wrote: I don't believe that the SATA drives are the same as regular IDE/ATA. They boast double the MTBF numbers, comparable to SCSI. I'm not an expert, and I'm inviting debate, but I believe you're wrong to say they are the same except for the interface. Surely some components inside must be different if the MTBF numbers is double (and comparable to SCSI). Often SCSI drives are expected to run for longer interval in a server. With an expectation for fewer spinups per operational hour than a desktop system it wouldn't be surprising that their MTBF rate is higher. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
but then why would SATA also have the higher MTBF? I really think that
there's a difference but hopefully someone knows better than me. "kony" wrote in message ... On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 23:48:29 GMT, "AFN" wrote: I don't believe that the SATA drives are the same as regular IDE/ATA. They boast double the MTBF numbers, comparable to SCSI. I'm not an expert, and I'm inviting debate, but I believe you're wrong to say they are the same except for the interface. Surely some components inside must be different if the MTBF numbers is double (and comparable to SCSI). Often SCSI drives are expected to run for longer interval in a server. With an expectation for fewer spinups per operational hour than a desktop system it wouldn't be surprising that their MTBF rate is higher. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
AFN:
but then why would SATA also have the higher MTBF? I really think that there's a difference but hopefully someone knows better than me. Where are you getting your MTBF numbers from? I just checked a few websites, Western Digital, Maxtor and Seagate, here is what I found: WD Enterprise: no difference in MTBF between ATA & SATA IDE: Desktop: no difference in MTBF between ATA & SATA Enterprise drives have a higher MTBF than desktop drives WD no longer builds SCSI drives Seagate SCSI: MTBF same as WD Enterprise drives IDE: same as Desktop class WD drives Seagate does not appear to build enterprise class IDE drives Maxtor SCSI: MTBF slightly higher than WD or Seagate enterprise class IDE: same as Seagate & WD desktop class Conclusions based on the web specs from these 3 manufacturers: There is no difference in MTBF between ATA, SATA & SCSI in enterprise class drives. There is no difference in MTBF between ATA & SATA. Western Digital is the only one of the three that is providing enterprise class IDE drives. Maxtor and Seagate are targeting desktop users with their IDE lines. Seagate & Maxtor have decided to focus on SCSI drives for their enterprise customers. Recomendations: You should focus on buying a drive targeted to the level of reliability you need and they can afford. If you wish to use desktop class drives then set them up with an automated backup system so that when a drive inevitably fails, you can replace the drive and restore the system with a minimum of downtime and lost data. -- Mac Cool |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 17:51:17 GMT, "AFN"
wrote: I need to buy some drives for a company server, to be used in a RAID configuration. I'm used to buying SCSI drives, because I love 1) that they feel cool to the touch when running and 2) they have a high "mean time between failure" number (MTBF). I just hate the price of SCSI drives and this is for a small business. Now, I see that SATA drives have a good MTBF number comparable to SCSI. So I'm thinking of buying the Maxtor 9 or 10 series SATA drives or the WD Raptors that spin at 10k. They all have MTBF numbers like SCSI drives but can someone tell me how cool or hot they are to the touch? If an IDE (regular ATA) drive runs warm/hot, and a SCSI drive in the same enclosure runs cool, where does SATA fall? Does anyone know from experience touching these drives while they're running? The answer is that there is nothing inherant about SCSI that will make a drive more or less susceptible to high ambient temp. You have some mismatched components for your comparison if you find SCSI "cool to the touch", there is no difference except perhaps lower component function on the drive PCB itself, moved to the controller card instead. This simply moves a point of failure though, is not a justification one way or the other. SATA, IDE, SCSI are not details relevant to choosing drive temp. RPM may be, so if it's THAT important for some extreme environment then choose a 5400 RPM drive and a suitably modified cooling system. There are temp readings taken of a few drives for comparison, Goggle may find them. The ultimate answer is that if your drives are being used in an enironment mild enough to be hospitable to a computer and user, a bay with appropriate active cooling [fan(s) in front or rear] will be sufficient for any drives. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
SATA Cables and Normal Hard Drives | Si | General | 3 | August 26th 04 06:54 AM |
SATA Drives and Raid | MrB | General | 2 | June 2nd 04 01:08 AM |
SATA Drives and Heat | Richard Alexander | General | 18 | April 20th 04 04:13 AM |
How good are SATA drives compared to IDE drives? | Dunny Rummy | General | 1 | February 12th 04 09:03 PM |
How to install new SATA drives for RAID 0? | [email protected] | General | 2 | February 11th 04 03:58 PM |