riscy
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Should we have SCSI?

To: riscy@pyramid.com
Subject: Re: Should we have SCSI?
From: tim@ubitrex.mb.ca (Tim Braun)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 93 16:16:34 CDT
Reply-to: riscy@pyramid.com
Sender: riscy-request@pyramid.com
> 
>     I would tend towards the 5380 type, as they are multiple sourced
>     (cheap), well-known (Seagate ST-01), and can provide reasonable
>     performance.  
> 
> Nope.
> 
> I wrote the Linux Seagate ST-01 (ie, with the Nat. Semi part) driver, and 
> I would avoid this part like the plague.  ...

I had heard the DP5380 had bugs, but didn't know the extent of them.  It's
precisely this experience that's useful to us, though.  The derivative chips 
(dp8490, 53c80, 53c90) chips were more what I meant, and the similarity can 
be useful.  Choosing a chip that's a complete unknown leads to a repeat 
performance (return of the plague).

> IMHO, the 53cf90 series is the best choice I've seen so far, I don't
> know about the Western Digital chip, but it rings a bell as the chip
> used in the WD7000 controller.

NCR 53cf90 sounds fine, assuming the pricing holds (US$19.45).  I assume
the "cf" is faster than the "c"?  The data you gave didn't say why one would
pay the US$1.85 more for the "cf".

You know, I've been watching/collecting data on chips like this for years, 
and do you think I can find any of it in my office now?  Not a chance.
________________________________________________________________
Tim Braun                          |
Ubitrex Corporation                | Voice: 204-942-2992 ext 228
1900-155 Carlton St                | FAX:   204-942-3001
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3C 3H8 | Email: tim@ubitrex.mb.ca

 

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>