 | | Re: Desktops with SCSI RAM?
|
|
(...) Yes indeed. Also bad for anything both cpu and disk intensive, like compiling or certain graphics stuff. (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Desktops with SCSI RAM?
|
|
This is a result of the Number One difference between IDE/UDMA and SCSI; IDE 'borrows' number-crunching from the system processor (thus affecting processor load and responsiveness), whereas SCSI has all the number-crunching built into the controller (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Desktops with SCSI RAM?
|
|
Quantum still makes these, and calls them Solid State Disks. They have a bad size/capacity ratio, but phenomenal access times and reads-per-second rates. (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Desktops with SCSI RAM?
|
|
(...) of In the olden days before processors could address massive amounts of RAM, you could get cards and external peripherals that contained dynamic volatile RAM on a SCSI interface that would behave like very fast disk. It was used for video (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Choices
|
|
(...) That would be Shugart (...) Actually it was spelled SASI and pronounced "sassy". It later became a non-company specified standard and was renamed SCSI. (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
