roode@anansi.acs.uci.edu (Dana Roode) (08/09/90)
We are setting a group of high-speed workstations (perhaps DECsystem 5000s) that will be running very large 3d visualization packages and codes. We anticipate lots of memory and paging activity. We are thinking of buying a good amount of RAM (32mb) on each system, and giving each a local swapping/temporary storage disk. We want about 200-300mb disks - what do people feel is a good performing, reliable, reasonably priced SCSI disk? What we are familar with and/or have good access to include CDC Wren IV's, MaxTor LXT200s's, and the DEC RZ55. Transfer rates on each seem quite similar, but the DEC disk seems to have a slower seek/access time than the other two. Given that a paging disk will jump around alot, this seems important. Does anyone have any insight on this? I am beginning to think it doesnt much matter which disk we go with. Should we just stick with the RZ55? Please respond via e-mail, to: Dana Roode droode@uci.edu -or- DRoode@UCI (Bitnet) UC Irvine
abstine@image.soe.clarkson.edu (Arthur Stine) (08/09/90)
From article <26C0DD8D.22566@orion.oac.uci.edu>, by roode@anansi.acs.uci.edu (Dana Roode): > > We are setting a group of high-speed workstations (perhaps DECsystem > 5000s) that will be running very large 3d visualization packages and > codes. We anticipate lots of memory and paging activity. We are > thinking of buying a good amount of RAM (32mb) on each system, and > giving each a local swapping/temporary storage disk. > > We want about 200-300mb disks - what do people feel is a good performing, > reliable, reasonably priced SCSI disk? What we are familar with > and/or have good access to include CDC Wren IV's, MaxTor LXT200s's, > and the DEC RZ55. Transfer rates on each seem quite similar, but > the DEC disk seems to have a slower seek/access time than the other > two. Given that a paging disk will jump around alot, this seems > important. If you are looking for some fast disks in the 300MB range, look into the CDC (now Seagate) Wren-Runners. They have a faster seek time (since they spin faster than 3600 rpm) and their transfer rates are also higher I believe. The other Wren's are good too, just not quite as speedy as the WrenRunner. HP makes some good 600M drives too. If you shop around, you can find either of these two types of drives with 5yr warranties too, which saves $$ in the long run. BTW: The RZ55 can be made to run faster with the FCO for the ROMs inside. The original 55 was a slug, due to the older ROM's. Newer 55's are better, although probably not as good as a normal Wren and not close to the Wren Runner. -- Art Stine Sr Network Engineer Clarkson U ABStine@CLVMS.Clarkson.Edu
reha@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Reha Elci) (08/10/90)
The new RZ55's that come in the storage expansion box are significantly faster than the old rz55's. I would definitely stick with them since reliability has been much better (in comparison to CDC Wren's etc...). If you want absolutely the fastest the new double cached RZ57 is as good as a disk gets... Reha Elci
jones@acsu.buffalo.edu (terry a jones) (08/10/90)
In article <1990Aug9.183554.20896@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> reha@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Reha Elci) writes: >The new RZ55's that come in the storage expansion box are significantly >faster than the old rz55's. I would definitely stick with them since >reliability has been much better (in comparison to CDC Wren's etc...). >If you want absolutely the fastest the new double cached RZ57 is as good >as a disk gets... > >Reha Elci The only problem I see with this is the price. I added a Conner CP-3100 to my MicroVAX 3100. For what DEC is charging for the RZ23, I can buy four of the CP-3100s. It is essentially the same drive manufactured by Conner, with DEC's configuration and labelling added. With a bit of research I'm sure you can get a much better drive for your dollar, if not the same drive. Terry Jones -- Terry Jones {rutgers,uunet}!acsu.buffalo.edu!jones SUNY at Buffalo ECE Dept. or: rutgers!ub!jones You are in a maze of twisty little compiler features, all different.
braun@drivax.UUCP (Kral) (08/10/90)
In article <26C0DD8D.22566@orion.oac.uci.edu> roode@anansi.acs.uci.edu (Dana Roode) writes: > >We want about 200-300mb disks - what do people feel is a good performing, >reliable, reasonably priced SCSI disk? What we are familar with >and/or have good access to include CDC Wren IV's, MaxTor LXT200s's, >and the DEC RZ55. Transfer rates on each seem quite similar, but >the DEC disk seems to have a slower seek/access time than the other >two. Given that a paging disk will jump around alot, this seems >important. > >Does anyone have any insight on this? I am beginning to think >it doesnt much matter which disk we go with. Should we just stick >with the RZ55? I answered Dana's posting via email, as requested, but I have a similar question I would like to post. We have an MV3100 running 3.x Ultrix, and we had originally purchased the machine with a pair of Fujitsu M2263s 650 MB drives. It turns out that the cacheing firmware has a bug in it, corrupting data. We are seriously considering tossing these back to the dealer and getting either an RZ57 or a pair of RZ56s. However, I would like to try one more time to get a better $/MB deal. Is there anyone out there running Ultrix with SCSI drives that can 'fur sure' recommend any 3rd party drives? We have need between 1000 and 1500 MB, and we have an internal RZ23 (104MB) drive. Thanx, -- kral * 408/647-6112 * {uunet|amdahl}!drivax!braun * braun%drivax@uunet.uu.net The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not "Eureka!" (I found it!) but "That's funny ..." -- Isaac Asimov [Friends don't let friends use DOS]
dplatt@coherent.com (Dave Platt) (08/10/90)
In article <1990Aug9.144555.18566@sun.soe.clarkson.edu> abstine@image.soe.clarkson.edu (Arthur Stine) writes: > If you are looking for some fast disks in the 300MB range, look into the > CDC (now Seagate) Wren-Runners. They have a faster seek time (since they spin > faster than 3600 rpm) and their transfer rates are also higher I believe. > The other Wren's are good too, just not quite as speedy as the WrenRunner. According to a conversation I had with an Imprimis/CDC/Seagate rep at Systems/USA earlier this year, Wren Runner drives spin at the same speed as normal Wrens. A 300-meg Wren Runner is built using the same mechanism as a 600-meg Wren... but the Runner firmware is set up to use only the outer half of the disk. A 600-meg Wren (or a 300-meg Wren Runner) has its cylinders packed roughly twice as closely as a normal 300-meg Wren. Hence, when a 300-meg Wren Runner must move its heads to a new cylinder, it must move them (on average) only about half as far as a normal Wren would have to move. This cuts the seek-time by roughtly one third, on average (e.g. 10 msec typical rather than 16). It's true that Seagate/Imprimis is working on drives which spin faster than the usual 3600 RPM. This increases the drive's transfer rate... the speed with which it can read or write data _after_ the seek has been completed and the drive is on-sector. It doesn't directly affect seek speed by very much (except for latency within the track being sought).