Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
On 09-09-27 01:10 PM, Doug McNutt wrote: le. Meanwhile, also, this machine is noisy. Anyone know of a quiet fan I could replace with? Which fan. In my case the noise was from the small fan on the AGP video card that came with the Mac from Apple. It's pretty easy to unplug the AGP fan and check the noise without it. Unfortunately it probably not a good idea to simply leave it unplugged. I took the original card out. It currently has an ATI 9200LE in it and that does not have a fan. Even with this 'super' video card, Youtube runs like snail. Anyway, would it be good to get ATI's drivers for this card, or just use the one in OS X. Does ATI have them? As regards the fan, I was talking about the large fan that sits right below the PSU. Can that be changed for a quieter fan. It's quite noisy. Thanks! --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
while the PCI bus IS slower than the system bus, it is NOT the limiting factor in data transfer to and from the HD. in a sawtooth, the PCI bus speed is 33 MHz and the data path is 64 bits wide. multiply (33,000,000 cycles/s) times (64 bits/cycle), and you get 2112 Mbits/s, and dividing by 8 (bits/byte), you find that the PCI bus has a theoretical limit of 264 MB/s data transfer rate. in reality it is somewhat slower, but even if we take a conservative estimate of 80% of the theoretical max, that's still 211 MB/s. that is way faster than the controller interface. but the controller interface is STILL not the limiting factor. there is no single HD in existence that can get anywhere near that, and if we are talking about a drive of the same vintage as the sawtooth in the original post, the chances are good that it is somewhere around 5-10 MB/s sustained internal transfer rate, and definitely not more than 25-30 MB/s sustained internal transfer rate. the most modern, most expensive, SATA drives are just reaching 60 MB/s internal transfer rates, and the best IDE (PATA) or Ultra3 SCSI-LVD drives i have ever tested are about 40-50 MB/s. so, ONCE AGAIN, to sum it up, NONE of the busses OR controller interfaces are the limiting factor, when considering a single HD connected to either a PCI controller OR the onboard controller. the HD itself is the limiting factor. is any of this getting thru? On Sep 18, 3:36 pm, John Niven sense...@yahoo.com wrote: So to sum up, the 100MHz system (and memory bus) bandwidth is NOT the limiting factor for a scsi disk connected via a PCI card, it is the PCI bus speed. This same limitation applies to all other pci connected disk systems. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
--- On Sun, 9/20/09, ah...clem boneheads...@gmail.com wrote: while the PCI bus IS slower than the system bus, it is NOT the limiting factor in data transfer to and from the HD. in a sawtooth, the PCI bus speed is 33 MHz and the data path is 64 bits wide. multiply (33,000,000 cycles/s) times (64 bits/cycle), and you get 2112 Mbits/s, and dividing by 8 (bits/byte), you find that the PCI bus has a theoretical limit of 264 MB/s data transfer rate. And exactly how many 33MHz/64bit adapter cards (SATA/PATA) are there? My point was that a 32bit card might run at 66MHz in a modern pc but is only going to have a max bandwidth of 132MB/s in a powermac. is any of this getting thru? Apparently not. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
- Original Message From: ah...clem boneheads...@gmail.com and if we are talking about a drive of the same vintage as the sawtooth in the original post, the chances are good that it is somewhere around 5-10 MB/s sustained internal transfer rate, and definitely not more than 25-30 MB/s sustained internal transfer rate. the most modern, most expensive, SATA drives are just reaching 60 MB/s internal transfer rates, and the best IDE (PATA) or Ultra3 SCSI-LVD drives i have ever tested are about 40-50 MB/s. FYI, Just thought I run some tests on a 450 MHz Sawtooth with an ATTO UL2D SCSI controller with a pair of Western Digital 18 GB Ultra 2 LVD (WDE 18300) drives connected. Using ATTO's ExpressPro Tools under OS 9.2.2 Peak Read: 52.89 MB/sec Sustained Read: 50.19 MB/sec Peak Write: 29.98 MB/sec Sustained Write 26.82 MB/sec Settings: 128 KB Max transfer size 2 MB sample size. The transfer rates decrease with larger transfer and sample size settings. They work flawlessly in OS 9 and OS X in the Sawtooth. Plenty fast for my needs. The ATTO controller and drives were pulled from a PM 7500 G3/450 with a 50 MHz bus speed many years ago; they are quite old. The transfer rate in 7500 were about half the rates above IIRC. --glen --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
--- On Fri, 9/18/09, Bruce Johnson john...@pharmacy.arizona.edu wrote: 10K enterprise SCSI drives hooked up to UWSCSI interfaces can blast data at astonishing rates...until, that is, they hit the congested two- lane road that is the Yike's 100Mhz bus. I thought the PCI bus was 33Mhz. Isn't that the bottleneck? That was one of the reasons I liked ATTO PCI scsi cards. They are 64bits wide so take full advantage of the wide pci slot in G3/G4's. That still only gets you to 66MHz equivalent though. Maybe just lore but I remember reading that scsi drives put less demand on the cpu than ATA, because they have a smarter controller. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
At 10:39 AM -0700 9/18/2009, John Niven wrote: I thought the PCI bus was 33Mhz. Isn't that the bottleneck? Just for comparison: A 33-MHz PCI bus, 32-bits wide, does aro 132 MB/sec. A 50-MHz System bus, 32-bits wide, does aro 200 MB/sec. - Dan. -- - Psychoceramic Emeritus; South Jersey, USA, Earth. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
--- On Fri, 9/18/09, Dan dantear...@gmail.com wrote: I thought the PCI bus was 33Mhz. Isn't that the bottleneck? Just for comparison: A 33-MHz PCI bus, 32-bits wide, does aro 132 MB/sec. A 50-MHz System bus, 32-bits wide, does aro 200 MB/sec. So a 33-MHz PCI bus, 64-bits wide, does 264 MB/sec? And PC100 SDRAM (3.3V, unbuffered, 64-bit, 168-pin, 100 MHz) does 400 MB/sec? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
On Sep 18, 2009, at 10:39 AM, John Niven wrote: Maybe just lore but I remember reading that scsi drives put less demand on the cpu than ATA, because they have a smarter controller. Yes and no. They do use less CPU, but with CPU's newer than about a 68020 it's not noticeable. SCSI has a place in enterprise systems, where I/O is totally critical, but there we're dealing with big SAN's, and even there the diff between SATA and SCSI is pretty much gone, and SATA is even catching up to SAS (Serial attached SCSI), and SATA is vastly cheaper than SCSI or SAS. -- Bruce Johnson University of Arizona College of Pharmacy Information Technology Group Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
At 11:09 AM -0700 9/18/2009, John Niven wrote: --- On Fri, 9/18/09, Dan dantear...@gmail.com wrote: A 33-MHz PCI bus, 32-bits wide, does aro 132 MB/sec. A 50-MHz System bus, 32-bits wide, does aro 200 MB/sec. So a 33-MHz PCI bus, 64-bits wide, does 264 MB/sec? PCI 64-bit/33 MHz is 266.7 MB/s PCI 32-bit/66 MHz is 266.7 MB/s And PC100 SDRAM (3.3V, unbuffered, 64-bit, 168-pin, 100 MHz) does 400 MB/sec? Remember - PCI bus is for *peripheral* interconnects. It is NOT the memory/system bus. Peak bandwidth for a PC-100 SDRAM is 800 MB/sec (100 MHz * 8 byte latch). - Dan. -- - Psychoceramic Emeritus; South Jersey, USA, Earth. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
At 12:03 PM -0700 9/18/2009, John Niven wrote: --- On Fri, 9/18/09, Dan dantear...@gmail.com wrote: Remember - PCI bus is for *peripheral* interconnects. It is NOT the memory/system bus. But that is the route that a PCI card connected SCSI disk would go (which is why I brought it up). yes. Just pointing out the diff, so folx don't get confused about you adding stick bandwidth to the thread. Also any add-on SATA or firewire drive connected via a PCI card. Most of these are 32bit wide and while they run a 66MHz on a modern machine they will only run at 33MHz on an older G4. Therefore looking for a 64 bit card is important. The ATTO scsi cards are 64bit, the Adaptek ones are not. Correct. For full throttle, the whole highway needs to be smooth and wide - drive, interface, pci bus, processor, etc. - Dan. -- - Psychoceramic Emeritus; South Jersey, USA, Earth. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
--- On Fri, 9/18/09, Dan dantear...@gmail.com wrote: yes. Just pointing out the diff, so folx don't get confused about you adding stick bandwidth to the thread. So to sum up, the 100MHz system (and memory bus) bandwidth is NOT the limiting factor for a scsi disk connected via a PCI card, it is the PCI bus speed. This same limitation applies to all other pci connected disk systems. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
So, just to jump in and possibly confuse things more, a SATA drive, connected via a pci card, would also be strangled by the limits of the pci bus? So in my fw800, a drive connected to the ata100 bus would read/write faster than one connected via a pci card? Assuming the same/ similar drive (spindle speed/cache size) in both cases that is. OR, (if I'm remembering right) would the fact that a sata drive can read and write simultaneously outweigh the (possibly) slower bus speed, or am I totally making this all up? On 18 Sep 2009, at 20:36, John Niven sense...@yahoo.com wrote: --- On Fri, 9/18/09, Dan dantear...@gmail.com wrote: yes. Just pointing out the diff, so folx don't get confused about you adding stick bandwidth to the thread. So to sum up, the 100MHz system (and memory bus) bandwidth is NOT the limiting factor for a scsi disk connected via a PCI card, it is the PCI bus speed. This same limitation applies to all other pci connected disk systems. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
Mike wrote: So, just to jump in and possibly confuse things more, a SATA drive, connected via a pci card, would also be strangled by the limits of the pci bus? So in my fw800, a drive connected to the ata100 bus would read/write faster than one connected via a pci card? Assuming the same/ similar drive (spindle speed/cache size) in both cases that is. OR, (if I'm remembering right) would the fact that a sata drive can read and write simultaneously outweigh the (possibly) slower bus speed, or am I totally making this all up? On 18 Sep 2009, at 20:36, John Niven sense...@yahoo.com wrote: --- On Fri, 9/18/09, Dan dantear...@gmail.com wrote: yes. Just pointing out the diff, so folx don't get confused about you adding stick bandwidth to the thread. So to sum up, the 100MHz system (and memory bus) bandwidth is NOT the limiting factor for a scsi disk connected via a PCI card, it is the PCI bus speed. This same limitation applies to all other pci connected disk systems. A lot (most?) of the peripherals are connected via the PCI bus even those built into the logic board. Off hand I don't know of a way to determine how an interface is connected. -- Clark Martin Redwood City, CA, USA Macintosh / Internet Consulting I'm a designated driver on the Information Super Highway --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
-- On Fri, 9/18/09, Mike mike.dogho...@googlemail.com wrote: So in my fw800, a drive connected to the ata100 bus would read/write faster than one connected via a pci card? The fw800 only has 33MHz PCI slots but they are 64bit capable. That means that a 32bit PCI card would clock a maximum of 4 bytes every 30.3nS or 132MBytes/s. I guess that's fast enough for an ATA/100 drive, and about the same as a 1.5Gbits/s SATA drive. However, it will limit a newer 3Gbits/s SATA drive, unless you can find a 33MHz/64bit SATA PCI card, which I don't think anybody makes. On the other hand a pair of raid striped U160 SCSI drives attached to an ATTO UL3D 64bit PCI card could max out at 264MBytes/s and could be spinning at 15Krpm! --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
On Sep 18, 2009, at 2:41 PM, John Niven wrote: On the other hand a pair of raid striped U160 SCSI drives attached to an ATTO UL3D 64bit PCI card could max out at 264MBytes/s and could be spinning at 15Krpm! And they'll have the added benefit of substituting for a space heater. Huh? Oh... I SAID THEY'LL HAVE THE ADDED BENEFIT OF SUBSTITUTING FOR A SPACE HEATER! I've worked for long periods in close proximity to a bunch of 15K SCSI drives, and have tinnitus to remember 'em by. :-/ though to be fair, the turbofan-like whine of the cooling fans may have added to the problem, too. Our 'server room/office' used to be about 15'x20' with desks for four people and a bunch of servers and three big raid boxes crammed in there...it was always very hot and noisy, and the fileservers+raid boxes sat on a table right behind me. -- Bruce Johnson University of Arizona College of Pharmacy Information Technology Group Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
--- On Fri, 9/18/09, Bruce Johnson john...@pharmacy.arizona.edu wrote: And they'll have the added benefit of substituting for a space heater. I had this setup in my works 450Mhz dual sawtooth. I didn't think they were noisy. On the otherhand I'm not saying it's the most practical compromise :-) But given the fact that we are trying to squeeze the most out of old hardware. BTW I found this G4 system diagram. Very interesting. http://developer.apple.com/legacy/mac/library/documentation/Hardware/Developer_Notes/Macintosh_CPUs-G4/PowerMacG4/2Architecture/jos_archi.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP3304-TPXREF101 --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
On Sep 16, 2009, at 6:20 PM, nestamicky wrote: Dan, shall we continue the discussion about having the SWAP files on the SCSIs? It's an exciting idea I'd dare to pursue. Mike Bombich (of Carbon Copy Cloner fame) used to have those directions quite clearly on his web site, and fortunately, the wayback machine has preserved them http://tinyurl.com/nwj7hd This applies to OS x 10.1 http://tinyurl.com/mmomh4 Works for 10.2 http://www.math.columbia.edu/~bayer/OSX/swapfile/ Applies to 10.3 and 10.4 And frankly, if you have a machine running 10.5 the issue is mootyou won't see any improvement moving swapfiles. -- Bruce Johnson University of Arizona College of Pharmacy Information Technology Group Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
On 09-09-17 09:25 AM, Bruce Johnson wrote: Mike Bombich (of Carbon Copy Cloner fame) used to have those directions quite clearly on his web site, and fortunately, the wayback machine has preserved them http://tinyurl.com/nwj7hd This applies to OS x 10.1 http://tinyurl.com/mmomh4 Works for 10.2 http://www.math.columbia.edu/~bayer/OSX/swapfile/ Applies to 10.3 and 10.4 And frankly, if you have a machine running 10.5 the issue is mootyou won't see any improvement moving swapfiles. Bruce, you're great! Thanks so much. I will now weigh the time, possible problems against the benefits of doing this. Here of course I'd appreciate feedback, given the particular project of deciding whether the SCSIs drives and cards I've discussed would, by themselves, produce an appreciable speed benefit compared to using IDE drives. Someone had challenged the technology is irrelevant and said that the age of the drive determines the speed of the drive, exclusively. I'm doubtful of the merits of that claim though. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
U2W. On 09-09-15 05:48 PM, Len Gerstel wrote: **IF** the card is Mac compatible and IF it is OS X Bootable. The card you linked to does not appear to be Mac compatible according to adaptec at: http://www.adaptec.com/en-US/support/_eol/aaa_raid/AAA-131U2/ You may want to hit the swap list for a Mac compatible card. Also, if you have never used a sever class drive in a desktop system, watch out for heat. Those 36GB 10K drives get HOT. I have another card that I found here but I can't seem to find it in the link that you've sent me. So, I'm putting the numbers here: AHA- 2940U2W. Would this be bootable, do you know. Am I getting it clear that there's no clear advantage to putting the OS on the SCSI disks? I plan on keeping a close eye on the heat if I do end up with these in the machine. Thanks a lot for letting me know that, and also about the card been bootable, as I'd have spent ages on that. Dan, shall we continue the discussion about having the SWAP files on the SCSIs? It's an exciting idea I'd dare to pursue. Thanks a lot guys. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
On Sep 16, 2009, at 9:20 PM, nestamicky wrote: U2W. On 09-09-15 05:48 PM, Len Gerstel wrote: **IF** the card is Mac compatible and IF it is OS X Bootable. The card you linked to does not appear to be Mac compatible according to adaptec at: http://www.adaptec.com/en-US/support/_eol/aaa_raid/AAA-131U2/ You may want to hit the swap list for a Mac compatible card. Also, if you have never used a sever class drive in a desktop system, watch out for heat. Those 36GB 10K drives get HOT. I have another card that I found here but I can't seem to find it in the link that you've sent me. So, I'm putting the numbers here: AHA- 2940U2W. Would this be bootable, do you know. I am pretty sure there are both Mac and PC versions of this card. Take a look at the sticker that says AHA-2940U2W. I believe the Mac version has Mac printed on the sticker. I had one of these in my OS9 days and it was bootable. Just remember that Apple has been letting SCSI die a slow death and has had less and less support for it in each version of X. Am I getting it clear that there's no clear advantage to putting the OS on the SCSI disks? If the disks are faster, then it will be advantageous to put your OS on it. Back when I had a 9GB (pretty sure 10K) drive on one in a beige G3, a modern (at the time) 120GB ata on the main onboard interface out performed the SCSI drive. Dan, shall we continue the discussion about having the SWAP files on the SCSIs? It's an exciting idea I'd dare to pursue. How much ram do you have? The more ram the less important the swap file is. Len --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
On 09-09-16 08:34 PM, Len Gerstel wrote: I am pretty sure there are both Mac and PC versions of this card. Take a look at the sticker that says AHA-2940U2W. I believe the Mac version has Mac printed on the sticker. I had one of these in my OS9 days and it was bootable. Just remember that Apple has been letting SCSI die a slow death and has had less and less support for it in each version of X. I've looked at the card over but can find 'mac' printed on it. But since this stands a better chance than the other, I will just give it a try and report. Now, how can I proceed with this, given that I'd have nothing on the disks and the issue with drivers. Obviously, I'd have to install the OS before the drivers. But would the card work at the initial install without the drivers. If so, would I need to install the drivers once the OS has been installed? Am I getting it clear that there's no clear advantage to putting the OS on the SCSI disks? If the disks are faster, then it will be advantageous to put your OS on it. Back when I had a 9GB (pretty sure 10K) drive on one in a beige G3, a modern (at the time) 120GB ata on the main onboard interface out performed the SCSI drive. Do you think that the drives we've discussed which you've worked with and say do get hot, do you think those are faster than IDEs? I suppose I could go read benchmarks, but thought someone here would save me the time. And while I'm on that has anyone a USB 2.0 with NEC chip D720100AGM. I'd like to drop that in the Sawtooth as well. Thanks a lot, Len. Dan, shall we continue the discussion about having the SWAP files on the SCSIs? It's an exciting idea I'd dare to pursue. How much ram do you have? The more ram the less important the swap file is. Len --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
unless you are going to use a new or nearly new drive, chances are very high that the drive itself, NOT the interface, will be what determines the speed of data transfer. older drives can be as low as 5 MB/s sustained internal transfer rate. only the newest drives will have sustained internal transfer rates greater than either of the two controllers you mention. so all the discussion of interface transfer rates is wasted time. a single SCSI drive connected to an Ultra360 controller is NOT going to give you a 360 MB/s data transfer rate. to realize that maximum, you would need to put 10 or 12 LVD drives into a RAID, depending on the speed of the individual drives. and they would need to be relatively new drives to have anything over 30 MB/s internal transfer rates. HDST or HDTK or some other disk utility can be used to benchmark the sustained read and sustained write speeds of the drives themselves. as i said, unless you use a new drive, this will most likely be lower than the controller, and be the actual limiting factor. choose the faster drive, and use whatever interface it requires. a wise man once observed, there's nothing more dangerous than a little bit of knowledge. john --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
On Sep 15, 2009, at 7:31 PM, nestamicky wrote: On 09-09-15 12:52 AM, Dan wrote: Personally, I prefer putting OS X on the IDE drive, so as to avoid driver hassles. If your SCSI interface *and* drive is significantly faster, then consider moving your swapfiles over there. This does sound a good idea, though I don't know how to do it. Once you have it up and running on the IDE drive, you can use Carbon Copy Cloner to copy it over to the SCSI, **IF** (see below) From the hardware pov... The built-in IDE in the Sawtooth is Ultra ATA/33 (33 MB/sec). Exactly what model PCI SCSI card? What type of SCSI is it? SCSI ranges from 5 to over 300 MB/sec - all depends on the type. The SCSI card is an Adaptec SCSI Ultra 2LVD/SE. The chip is AIC-7815G. I found the card on Ebay:http://tinyurl.com/n7pddu The hard-drive is a Quantum Atlas 10KII 36.gb. I have two of those. **IF** the card is Mac compatible and IF it is OS X Bootable. The card you linked to does not appear to be Mac compatible according to adaptec at: http://www.adaptec.com/en-US/support/_eol/aaa_raid/AAA-131U2/ You may want to hit the swap list for a Mac compatible card. Also, if you have never used a sever class drive in a desktop system, watch out for heat. Those 36GB 10K drives get HOT. I recently went through and was Low level formatting a bunch of them. Basically 1 1/2 hours of full writing to the disk. After that time, they were hot enough to be uncomfortable to handle. Put that heat x2 in a closed desktop computer without additional cooling and you really need to keep an eye on the temperature. Len Sitting here with the side door of my DA open because it generates too much heat to be stable with a dual 1.2GHz processor and 4 HD, 2 x 120 GB IDE and 500GB and 1TB SATA drives. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
At 5:31 PM -0600 9/15/2009, nestamicky wrote: On 09-09-15 12:52 AM, Dan wrote: Personally, I prefer putting OS X on the IDE drive, so as to avoid driver hassles. If your SCSI interface *and* drive is significantly faster, then consider moving your swapfiles over there. This does sound a good idea, though I don't know how to do it. It's not for the novice. You have to futz with the underbelly, and deal with the ramifications later if you have drive problems. From the hardware pov... The built-in IDE in the Sawtooth is Ultra ATA/33 (33 MB/sec). Exactly what model PCI SCSI card? What type of SCSI is it? SCSI ranges from 5 to over 300 MB/sec - all depends on the type. The SCSI card is an Adaptec SCSI Ultra 2LVD/SE. The chip is AIC-7815G. I found the card on Ebay:http://tinyurl.com/n7pdduhttp://tinyurl.com/n7pddu The hard-drive is a Quantum Atlas 10KII 36.gb. I have two of those. See Len's reply. - Dan. -- - Psychoceramic Emeritus; South Jersey, USA, Earth. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Upgrading 400mhz Sawtooth
On Sep 15, 2009, at 8:17 PM, Dan wrote: At 5:31 PM -0600 9/15/2009, nestamicky wrote: On 09-09-15 12:52 AM, Dan wrote: Personally, I prefer putting OS X on the IDE drive, so as to avoid driver hassles. If your SCSI interface *and* drive is significantly faster, then consider moving your swapfiles over there. This does sound a good idea, though I don't know how to do it. It's not for the novice. You have to futz with the underbelly, and deal with the ramifications later if you have drive problems. Oops, I read that as moving your whole system over. Which, IF your drive is faster AND your card is bootable, will give you a significant boost. Just moving the swap over will help a little if your primary drive is cramped, but enough ram will make the swap file location ALMOST moot. Since you are running a Sawtooth and probably going to stick with 10.4, you probably do not need to worry about an Apple update making the card unbootable. That is why I still have the 120GB drives on the main IDE channel. Len --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
