Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 10:23:14 -0400 (EDT) From: "Gary D. Margiotta" <gary@tbe.net> To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Tulio_Guimar=E3es_da_Silva?= <tuliogs@pgt.mpt.gov.br> Cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: sil3114 versus sil3114a Message-ID: <20051014101740.L71298@kerplunk.tbe.net> In-Reply-To: <434FBC38.5020602@pgt.mpt.gov.br> References: <1129279679.1317.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> <003b01c5d0a3$a6250da0$0200a8c0@bennypc> <1129283233.1315.33.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20051014091016.J71298@kerplunk.tbe.net> <434FBC38.5020602@pgt.mpt.gov.br>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --0-1388702712-1129299794=:71298 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=X-UNKNOWN; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE [snip] > Highpoint has some reasonable RAID and multiport IDE and SATA cards, and = I=B4d=20 > bet the 18x0 series would be a good shot, since I already work with them.= =20 > It=B4s natively supported by FreeBSD 5.4, and has additional support from= =20 > Highpoint, what I consider a great thing, specially for management featur= es. > But if you=B4re going with 1820, I suggest you to get a 1820A, =B4cause i= t has=20 > an onboard XOR processor which speeds up things a bit AND frees some CPU= =20 > usage on RAID5 (important on not-so-new CPUs). ;). > However, if you don=B4t need RAID5, there are other options from Highpoin= t=20 > itself, but I don=B4t have a clue about prices. I would only not suggest= vinum=20 > on RAID5 unless you have a really good machine (at least hyperthreaded),= =20 > because it drains quite a bit from the CPU, but if it=B4s for personal us= e, or=20 > a low-end server, that could fit. > Actually, you are correct about the 1820A, I made a typographical=20 mistake... I do have an 1820A, and the reason I chose that over the=20 standard 1820 was the onboard processor. Sorry about the confusion. [snip] > > In a last thought, speed will greately depend on the hardware you=B4re us= ing=20 > (mobo, CPU, disks etc.), but they=B4re indeed quite good. I really hadn= =B4t=20 > noticed the backwards compatibility in the specs, but it=B4s a nice featu= re -=20 > you=B4ll really like it if someday you can afford a 64bit, 133MHz motherb= oard.=20 > :) > And, as for reliability, i have two 1820A running rock-solid, 24/7, besid= e=20 > me, on 2 HP ML110 machines. It=B4s too early to say, since it hasn=B4t be= en yet 6=20 > months, but we haven=B4t had a single issue, even when we decided to play= with=20 > hot-swap. :) > Have luck, Good luck with your set, I'm already very impressed with the performance=20 of it (for the price), and I do plan on upgrading to a newer board/CPU one= =20 of these days. My problem is that I can't just throw something out if it= =20 still works, so I try to make use of it until it dies, and then I can=20 justify buying something new (however, by the time this board dies, I'll=20 most likely have inherited some other slightly newer still working board=20 without 64-bit PCI, and I'll be forced to use that until it dies... :) ).= =20 That's the primary reason I went with this board, that it would work in=20 what I already have, and should work for a time to come with whatever I do= =20 end up getting. I did splurge on a new Dual Xeon setup which will be for video encoding,=20 but I have a SCSI subsystem for that machine, and I needed the horsepower. > > Tulio G. da Silva > -Gary --0-1388702712-1129299794=:71298--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051014101740.L71298>