SCSI connectivity

From: ajp166 <>
Date: Sat Mar 10 22:32:40 2001

From: Chad Fernandez <>
>That's true, but you aren't using the full capacity of the slot. I

Maybe, likely it's not a fast machine anyway.

>suppose if you already have an ISA card, and don't really want to spend

>anymore it's fine. I have a setup like that. I have a VLB slot with a

The other side is even if you want to spend there are few NOS boards
out there and fewer have much performance.

>ISA 1542B installed. I haven't actually gotten the computer up yet....
>still have some IRQ/DMA conflicts, I think.

Likely. Then again I set those things up in my sleep.

>SCSI is backwards compatible as long as you keep Single Ended and
>Differential separate.

Thanks for the info... I only work with them for a lving. ;)

>I would think any high end 486 class machine
>would benefit from wide scsi. Remember SCSI doesn't rely on the CPU
>like IDE does.

No. No. I retired an old P133 server that had a Wide SCSI card in it..
With the 33mhz FSB there was little hope of using all the performance
of the SCSI-W nor the really fast disk 7200rpm disk hooked to it. With
VLB or EISA your likely talking a 486DX4/133 maximum and they
are even slower. I know I have a 5x86/133 with VESA and the best
I see on that one is maybe 30mb/sec and that the burst rate not
an average.

>I actually have a pair of 8-bit SCSI cards, a Seagate, and an NCR. I
>have used the Seagate, unfortunately it didn't see more than 2xx of the
>300megs of my HD, after I repartitioned the HD on that controller. I

That and the best data rate will be 8-10mb/sec. ISA isn't fast.
Win95 if you have the OEM disk has drivers for some pretty old and
oddball stuff.

Maybe the point I'm making is just getting them going is often all that
can be asked. Trying to go for maximum smpoke is often not worth
it as recent hardware is cheap and far faster.

Received on Sat Mar 10 2001 - 22:32:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:34:03 BST