Isn't firewire rated at a higher transfer rate that SCSI? Why not have internal set ups in all new macs? Doesn't this technology already exisit anyway? I still drop frames on DV playback with internal SCSI ultra 160 7200rpm cheetah drives and a dual proc. 533, something is wrong, and its not my settings. And what the hell is the deal with apple sys. bus speeds. Supposedly a third of apple customers are "creative Proffesionals" but their high end systems have 133 bus speeds???? I am a diehard mac fan, so of course it upsets me all the more that apple isn't responding. Come on Steve your a virtuoso....its time to fugure this out.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Will the G5 have an internal firewire drive bridge?
- Thread starter Mac DV
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I agree
I'm in the "creative professionals" category myself. The reason I didn't buy the dual 1Ghz is the bus. Im trying to hold out for the faster bus and DDR which I think, hope, and pray will come out at MWNY. I was all set to buy the new tower after MWSF but we all know what happened. Then when the 1GHZ finally came out it was a joke. It would have been a great thing if the bus had been updated or if the ram was....or both. Im waiting till NY, I have to buy then no matter what. I can only hope...
I'm in the "creative professionals" category myself. The reason I didn't buy the dual 1Ghz is the bus. Im trying to hold out for the faster bus and DDR which I think, hope, and pray will come out at MWNY. I was all set to buy the new tower after MWSF but we all know what happened. Then when the 1GHZ finally came out it was a joke. It would have been a great thing if the bus had been updated or if the ram was....or both. Im waiting till NY, I have to buy then no matter what. I can only hope...
speeds
The current version of FireWire (400Mbit) tops out at 50MB/second trasfer (burst rate I believe). SCSI has at least two speeds that exceed that. Those being the Ultra2Wide/LVD at 80MB/second and the Ultra160 at the (obviously) 160MB/second. ATA drives now come in 66, 100, and 133MB/second rates. As you can see, both of those interface types exceed FireWire by anywhere from 16-83MB/second.
With FireWire 2 spec has not been officially announced as of yet, you would be best off with either SCSI or ATA drives inside. Provided you have a quality controller card for the SCSI, or ATA (for the drives above the speed that the mobo supports).
I would tend to think that the rpm of your current drive is more to blame then the interface type. A 7200 rpm drive is a low end Cheetah. I actually can't recall ever seeing a Cheetah at 7200. I have a pair of the 18GB, Ultra2Wide 10,000 rpm Cheetah's that were obtained about 4+ years ago. I know that Seagate offers 15,000 rpm models, which you might want to try out.
Where did you get the 7200rpm drive? Any chance you can return it and go for the 10,000 or 15,000 rpm model?
The current version of FireWire (400Mbit) tops out at 50MB/second trasfer (burst rate I believe). SCSI has at least two speeds that exceed that. Those being the Ultra2Wide/LVD at 80MB/second and the Ultra160 at the (obviously) 160MB/second. ATA drives now come in 66, 100, and 133MB/second rates. As you can see, both of those interface types exceed FireWire by anywhere from 16-83MB/second.
With FireWire 2 spec has not been officially announced as of yet, you would be best off with either SCSI or ATA drives inside. Provided you have a quality controller card for the SCSI, or ATA (for the drives above the speed that the mobo supports).
I would tend to think that the rpm of your current drive is more to blame then the interface type. A 7200 rpm drive is a low end Cheetah. I actually can't recall ever seeing a Cheetah at 7200. I have a pair of the 18GB, Ultra2Wide 10,000 rpm Cheetah's that were obtained about 4+ years ago. I know that Seagate offers 15,000 rpm models, which you might want to try out.
Where did you get the 7200rpm drive? Any chance you can return it and go for the 10,000 or 15,000 rpm model?
SCSI keeps getting updated to better, and faster, standards. Since it is highly used in servers, I think it will be around for some time still.
AlphaTech is absolutely right. There are no 7,200 RPM Cheetah drives.
According to Seagate's site, Cheetahs are either 10,000, 10,022 or 15,000 RPM.. Barracudas are 7,200 RPM. Now, I don't want to say that this immediately invalidates the rest of your post.. but.. well..
as for firewire drives.. the older G4 towers did have an internal firewire connector.. but I have never seen a native firewire hard drive.. and they would be slower than ATA or SCSI anyway.
According to Seagate's site, Cheetahs are either 10,000, 10,022 or 15,000 RPM.. Barracudas are 7,200 RPM. Now, I don't want to say that this immediately invalidates the rest of your post.. but.. well..
as for firewire drives.. the older G4 towers did have an internal firewire connector.. but I have never seen a native firewire hard drive.. and they would be slower than ATA or SCSI anyway.
I have seen ATA to Firewire bridges to be used inside computers but I would question using them since anything above ATA66 is faster (hell, even that is faster).
I didn't really have enought time to post properly before. As far as the seagates go they are probably the 10,000. They were new from apple about 9 months ago. But I was't here when the comp was purchased and for whatever reason i thought they were 7200. If they r 10000 it just speaks to my arguement about the scsi bridge. I also agree that scsi is not going anywhere, and misspoke when i said it would die, hehehe. I use scsi everyday and am personally very excited about the developmant of this tech.
As I agreed with Alpha T. before, yes it would be faster to use existing internal bridges than a firewire bridge. And yes as stated in my first post, firewire bridges do exist today. I guess I was just trying to suggest a new tech. apple could potentially look into, considering they own a good amount of 1394 patents. I really do have a problem though, with apple bus speeds. My DP is bottlenecked and there isn't a single G.D. thing I can do about it.
BTW Alpha there is a big difference in tranfering/reading data and media files, and I willl tell you right now that my cheetahs drop frames on DV playback where only a 6 mb per sec. sustained T.R. is nessacary. And they are "rated" for 160. Not very often....but they do.
As I agreed with Alpha T. before, yes it would be faster to use existing internal bridges than a firewire bridge. And yes as stated in my first post, firewire bridges do exist today. I guess I was just trying to suggest a new tech. apple could potentially look into, considering they own a good amount of 1394 patents. I really do have a problem though, with apple bus speeds. My DP is bottlenecked and there isn't a single G.D. thing I can do about it.
BTW Alpha there is a big difference in tranfering/reading data and media files, and I willl tell you right now that my cheetahs drop frames on DV playback where only a 6 mb per sec. sustained T.R. is nessacary. And they are "rated" for 160. Not very often....but they do.
Serial ATA is the future
Keep your eye open for this technology.
Serial ATA is destined to surpass SCSI outright.
it boasts 400 MB/s tansfer rate and much thinner cables. It is an impressive technology.
check it out at:
http://serialata.org/
Keep your eye open for this technology.
Serial ATA is destined to surpass SCSI outright.
it boasts 400 MB/s tansfer rate and much thinner cables. It is an impressive technology.
check it out at:
http://serialata.org/