SCSI Solid state adapters

[Seblington]

Hi all, long time since I haev been on here.
I upgraded my GVP A530 with a rather expensive CF to SCSI converter

A video can be seen her

[ Show youtube player ]

I was looking for some new hardware and found this at half the price

http://amigakit.leamancomputing.com/...oducts_id=1264

Half the price and when it comes to transferring files from the A500 to the PC, it makes things so much easier

[Jope]

Good show..

I'm sure the aztecmonster is worth the money. At least you don't have to use a microsd card. ;-)

[Seblington]

Cheers, I prefer CF cards, they are much faster than SD, not that it makes much difference on the A530, think it has a max transfer rate of 2.5MB/sec?

[Jope]

Something like that.. In any case you don't have to wait too long for the entire RAM to fill up. :-D

And agreed, microSD is just something I don't want to use for random reads and writes, even if the Amiga is rather low on the write side.

[Locutus]

Cant be worse then a ancient 540MB SCSI disk....

[Seblington]

The A530 I found struggled with certain SCSI’s more down to the PSU didn’t have the current, lower rev drives were needed. I did install a 4GB drive and has to say it makes nicer mechanical sounds over the CF.

[Jope]

I absolutely adore my IBM Ultrastar DDRS.. 7.5ms seek times and it really sounds like you now have an efficient computer when you boot off it. :-D

Naturally it can't hold a candle to any solid state device. :-)

[glenn]

Why does everyone constantly say that CF is much faster than SD ?

A SD class 10 card do 10M/sec, and most cheap cards today are *at least* class 10.

Then we have the U-classes (UHS, the number written within a U), they go from 10-30M/sec.

And now we have the V-class cards, a V90-classed SD-card do at least 90M/sec.

A Sandisk extreme pro UHS-II do 280M/sec (250M/s write), does anyone here actually have a faster CF-card ?

https://www.sandisk.com/home/memory-...epro-sd-uhs-ii

Anyone that actually think that is the bottleneck when used in an Amiga ?

[Seblington]

Originally Posted by glenn

Why does everyone constantly say that CF is much faster than SD ?

A SD class 10 card do 10M/sec, and most cheap cards today are *at least* class 10.

Then we have the U-classes (UHS, the number written within a U), they go from 10-30M/sec.

And now we have the V-class cards, a V90-classed SD-card do at least 90M/sec.

A Sandisk extreme pro UHS-II do 280M/sec (250M/s write), does anyone here actually have a faster CF-card ?

https://www.sandisk.com/home/memory-...epro-sd-uhs-ii

Anyone that actually think that is the bottleneck when used in an Amiga ?

The SD is certainly slower than a CF

In the Amiga world on the old machines the difference isn’t really noticeable but when you use it on modern hardware theirs such a difference. I use a Canon 7D MKII which can shoot at 10 FPS, I brought the quickest SanDisk cards at the time, SD 95MB/sec, CF 160MB/sec. In the real world running both cards at the same time the CF does 257 shots JPEG 112 RAW before slowing down, the SD 187 shots JPEG 77 RAW, to get the best out of my camera the CF is set to RAW, the SD to JPEG, this gives 10 seconds of continues shooting but with the speed of the CF I burst shoot and it very rarely slows down, it would be a different story with an SD




My dream camera is the new 1DX MK II which does an amazing 16 FPS at 20MP, they recommend the CF III card 3400X which has a write speed of 440MB/sec and read 515MB/sec almost twice as fast as the SD


BUT TOTALLY AGREE for old Amiga hardware theres going to be near to no difference as the Amiga is the bottleneck, not the cards.

[Locutus]

Hmmm strange, i can only burstshoot for 36 shots on my SLR :-(

[Jope]

I personally don't really care about the speed, I care about the dubious reliability of MicroSD cards after lots of writes.

In this discussion the slower speed is more about the scsi2sd adapter's implementation, not the SD card itself. The Aztecmonster is the faster adapter according to benchmarks.

I also couldn't really care less about how well MicroSD cards have worked for other people. Good for you if they've worked fine and never broke down. You continue as a MicroSD user, I'll continue as a happy CF user. :-)

[Seblington]

Originally Posted by Jope

I personally don't really care about the speed, I care about the dubious reliability of MicroSD cards after lots of writes.

In this discussion the slower speed is more about the scsi2sd adapter's implementation, not the SD card itself. The Aztecmonster is the faster adapter according to benchmarks.

I also couldn't really care less about how well MicroSD cards have worked for other people. Good for you if they've worked fine and never broke down. You continue as a MicroSD user, I'll continue as a happy CF user. :-)

Oh I am glad to hear that :-) have to say I have had a microSD fail and one which was a 95MB/sec which only ran at 10MB/sec, both I think can be put down to being fakes (Fake Sandisk), my video cameras use SD and they never miss a beat.

But bottom line here, the A830 and I believe the impact series 2 have a maximum transfer of 2.5MB/sec so really I wouldn't see the problem running either, I might have gone for the CD one if it was available at the time but really glad I went for the CF as I have the appropriate readers for the PC and spare cards from my older Canons. I do miss the lovely HDD noises though, that is why I haven't upgraded my A590 with its incredible 20MB HDD, stepper driver sounds awesome :-), in fact the series II I have and the Roctech I wouldn't upgrade either, if it wasnt for the power issues with the larger HDD's on the A530 I might have not upgraded that either.

[whiteb]

The whole benefit of the A530 is the support of DMA access to the drive (Instead of PIA mode in the 1200. Although I suspect the 4GB CF card wont get to the max 30MB a sec, I think the 530 topped out at about 3MB a sec, maybe a bit more if you used say Gururom.