SATA vs SCSI?

[Harry]

I'm curious about which type people use? Also which one would be used most comman and mabye for higher traffic?

I know about Sata already, but not too much about SCSI... :disagree:

 

[vishi]

check out http://computer.howstuffworks.com/scsi.htm

 

[LeaseWeb]

SCSI performs better (faster) and lives longer but is also more expensive.

 

[Harry]

From what I know, usually SCSI is used, especially for VERY Large forums. I just haven't used a SCSI myself yet.

 

[Jamson]

SCSI = Faster than SATA, more reliable but really expensive
SATA = Fairly fast, tad unreliable but as cheap as IDE drives

 

[alemcherry]

SCSI all the way. RPM matters, go for 15,000 rpm even if it costs more. Big differnce for database performance.

 

[vishi]

Today SCSI technology is widely used for servers due to their hish performance efficiency over SATA. For detailed comparaision please go through the link below:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_ATA#SATA_vs_SCSI

 

[Noel_Colo-UK]

Most of the servers we use have SCSI drives we do have a few SATA machines and the SCSI do perform much better, they do cost a bit more than SATA but worth it in the long run as they are much faster and live longer.

 

[charlesgan]

sata is just fine.
bottleneck commonly is not at drive IO.

 

[yphost.com]

SCSI are faster and long lasting
but they tend to lighten your pockets at the same time!
I would suggest SCSI if you have the $$$ for it,,,...
else a SATA would work just fine!

 

[expedio]

If you need more disk space, say 500GB+, you can get sata at cheap prices. SCSI on the other hand will cost almost 5-6 times.

 

[eukvps]

SATA is good option

 

[dougeth]

I think most people have said it, but just to add my vote. If you have the cash SCSI is the best. But if you are working on a budget, the SATAs will work its just not going to give you the fast RPM speeds of the SCSI drives.

 

[BonsaiRack]

Same here.

SATA is a good choice, but because of the constant high speed of SCSI it is better for high demand web service.

 

[SkyNetHosting]

A good SATA Drives would be fine for average or advance usage. However if its for a monster servers such as larger scale VPS node etc then SCSI would be a must or you will end up having Disk IO related performance issues ones the drives get filled in.

 

[TotallyHost]

I would prefer SCSI drives for VPS nodes or DB machines, but otherwise for hosting in general, SATA will be more than enough to get the job done, and it's cheap.

 

[sparkstation]

SATA = Cheap SCSI = Good

 

[dbihosting]

I perfer SCSI. Reliable and fast. SATA is a decent second choice though if you are looking for a more cost effective solution.

 

[sid07]

SCSI gives a good RPM around 15-20000 thousand comparing with 8000 of SATA . The speed and reliability of SCSI is more then SATA although the price is a down side when comparing the two . I would go for SCSI if have that much money for performance .

 

[Matthew]

I would choose SCSI my self although the hosting company I worked for had a lot of SATA.