SEO

thefinn <thefinn@tpg.com.au> writes:

>How can I add scsi2 or better hard drives to a sparc 20?

You can add one internally, but it needs to be a 1" high (ie. low-profile)
drive to fit in the bays. You'll also need one of the special plastic
mounting frames.

The other alternative, if you want internal mounting is make up a way to
mount a drive in the CD-ROM drive bay and connect it to the 50-pin CD-ROM
data cable using an 80 pin to 50 pin adaptor or 68 to 50 pin adaptor
depending whether the target drive has an 80 or 68 pin SCSI interface
connector.

It's not an ideal method but if you don't have any of the special mounting
frames and you can't (or don't) want the drive mounted externally, it's the
only other viable option.

Regards,

Craig.
--
Email by Craig Dewick (tm). Home page at "lios.apana.org.au/~cdewick".
"cdewick@poison.lios.apana.org.au" or "cdewick@poison.sunshack.org".
Explore and enjoy my public-domain Sun Microsystems technical data archive
at "www.sunshack.org" or "www.sunshack.info".

Craig Dewick wrote:

> thefinn <thefinn@tpg.com.au> writes:
>
>
>>How can I add scsi2 or better hard drives to a sparc 20?
>
>
> You can add one internally, but it needs to be a 1" high (ie. low-profile)
> drive to fit in the bays. You'll also need one of the special plastic
> mounting frames.
>
> The other alternative, if you want internal mounting is make up a way to
> mount a drive in the CD-ROM drive bay and connect it to the 50-pin CD-ROM
> data cable using an 80 pin to 50 pin adaptor or 68 to 50 pin adaptor
> depending whether the target drive has an 80 or 68 pin SCSI interface
> connector.
>
> It's not an ideal method but if you don't have any of the special mounting
> frames and you can't (or don't) want the drive mounted externally, it's the
> only other viable option.

Assuming one has mounting frames (or can jury-rig - I made a couple
using bits of perspex from the surplus store), what's the fastest drive
an SS20 can actually utilise? I assume anything with an STR over 40Mb/s
would be wasted, or is it 20Mb/s?

While I'm here, how much difference do Ross 200Mhz processors make to an
SS20? Could I expect performance equivalent to a 360Mhz Ultra 5 if I
installed two? Four? Any reason to prefer the twin processor boards over
singles, aside from the twins consuming an SBUS slot?

TIA

>
> Regards,
>
> Craig.

Triffid wrote:

> Assuming one has mounting frames (or can jury-rig - I made a couple
> using bits of perspex from the surplus store), what's the fastest drive
> an SS20 can actually utilise? I assume anything with an STR over 40Mb/s
> would be wasted, or is it 20Mb/s?

Internal bus is 10MB/s, on the SBUS with a wide scsi card, you can
get almost 20MB/s.
>
> While I'm here, how much difference do Ross 200Mhz processors make to an
> SS20? Could I expect performance equivalent to a 360Mhz Ultra 5 if I
> installed two? Four? Any reason to prefer the twin processor boards over
> singles, aside from the twins consuming an SBUS slot?

Browse the web for CPU info for SS20's. There are heat issues with
some combos.

/Marcin

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 23:08:51 -0500, Triffid <triffid@nebula.net>
wrote:

>
>
>Craig Dewick wrote:
>
>> thefinn <thefinn@tpg.com.au> writes:
>>
>>
>>>How can I add scsi2 or better hard drives to a sparc 20?
>>
>>
>> You can add one internally, but it needs to be a 1" high (ie. low-profile)
>> drive to fit in the bays. You'll also need one of the special plastic
>> mounting frames.
>>
>> The other alternative, if you want internal mounting is make up a way to
>> mount a drive in the CD-ROM drive bay and connect it to the 50-pin CD-ROM
>> data cable using an 80 pin to 50 pin adaptor or 68 to 50 pin adaptor
>> depending whether the target drive has an 80 or 68 pin SCSI interface
>> connector.
>>
>> It's not an ideal method but if you don't have any of the special mounting
>> frames and you can't (or don't) want the drive mounted externally, it's the
>> only other viable option.
>
>Assuming one has mounting frames (or can jury-rig - I made a couple
>using bits of perspex from the surplus store), what's the fastest drive
>an SS20 can actually utilise? I assume anything with an STR over 40Mb/s
>would be wasted, or is it 20Mb/s?

SS20 is limited to 10MB/s on the built in SCSI.

>While I'm here, how much difference do Ross 200Mhz processors make to an
>SS20? Could I expect performance equivalent to a 360Mhz Ultra 5 if I
>installed two? Four? Any reason to prefer the twin processor boards over
>singles, aside from the twins consuming an SBUS slot?

This might be helpful:

http://mbus.sunhelp.org/modules/index.htm

Personally I think that the 200MHz Ross modules are overpriced. There
have been some on Ebay recently with a price tag of $500.00 for a pair
of dual 200MHz/512KB modules. For that price you can get a reasonably
equipped Ultra system.

Josh

Triffid wrote:

> While I'm here, how much difference do Ross 200Mhz processors make to an
> SS20?

Depends what you start with of course!

> Could I expect performance equivalent to a 360Mhz Ultra 5 if I
> installed two?

No

> Four?

No.

The HyperSPARCs are pretty useless CPUs really. I have a couple of pairs
of 125 MHz ones, and I rekon a pair of 125's is about the same speed
as a pair of 75 MHz SuperSPARCs. In fact, if anything, the latter are
faster. Remember UltraSPARCs are better than SuperSPARCs and run at much
higher clock rates. HyperSPARCs seem a dead loss to me.

To be honest, as someone who likes SS20's (I have 5), their day is past.
A low end Ultra 5/10 or 30 will knock the spots off an SS20. I would not
consider upgrading an SS20, other than to put a larger disk in it.

> Any reason to prefer the twin processor boards over
> singles, aside from the twins consuming an SBUS slot?

I don't know if 200's are available as single width boards. In fact, I'm
not 100% sure if its actually possible to fit 4x200 MHz in an SS20. I
know you can fit 4x150's, but I'm not sure about any higher.

Heat is also a big issue in SS20 - especially the HyperSPARC CPUs.

I bought an Ultra 60 with a single 360MHz CPU and 128MB ram for just
over 100 UK pounds a few weeks ago off eBay. Why waste money upgraiding
an SS20 when you can get a U60 for that money? U30's are even cheaper.
U5's and 10's seem to go for a bit more, but do have the advantage of
requiring cheaper IDE disks.

David Kirkby wrote:
> Triffid wrote:
>
>> While I'm here, how much difference do Ross 200Mhz processors make to
>> an SS20?
>
>
> Depends what you start with of course!
>
>> Could I expect performance equivalent to a 360Mhz Ultra 5 if I
>> installed two?
>
>
> No
>
>> Four?
>
>
> No.
>
> The HyperSPARCs are pretty useless CPUs really. I have a couple of pairs
> of 125 MHz ones, and I rekon a pair of 125's is about the same speed as
> a pair of 75 MHz SuperSPARCs. In fact, if anything, the latter are
> faster. Remember UltraSPARCs are better than SuperSPARCs and run at much
> higher clock rates. HyperSPARCs seem a dead loss to me.
>
> To be honest, as someone who likes SS20's (I have 5), their day is past.
> A low end Ultra 5/10 or 30 will knock the spots off an SS20. I would not
> consider upgrading an SS20, other than to put a larger disk in it.
>
>> Any reason to prefer the twin processor boards over singles, aside
>> from the twins consuming an SBUS slot?
>
>
> I don't know if 200's are available as single width boards. In fact, I'm
> not 100% sure if its actually possible to fit 4x200 MHz in an SS20. I
> know you can fit 4x150's, but I'm not sure about any higher.
>
> Heat is also a big issue in SS20 - especially the HyperSPARC CPUs.
>
> I bought an Ultra 60 with a single 360MHz CPU and 128MB ram for just
> over 100 UK pounds a few weeks ago off eBay. Why waste money upgraiding
> an SS20 when you can get a U60 for that money? U30's are even cheaper.
> U5's and 10's seem to go for a bit more, but do have the advantage of
> requiring cheaper IDE disks.

Thanks, I wasn't aware of the HyperSPARC heat and performance issues. I
recently inherited a pile of SS10s & 20s and was considering selling
some or trading for faster processors, but since there are already
several double-width 75Mhz SuperSPARC boards in the collection I think
I'll just assemble a couple of 'loaded' SS20s and save my upgrade
dollars to spend on second CPUs for my U2s.

Will heat be an issue if I run 4x75s in SS20s? Solutions?

Triffid <triffid@nebula.net> writes:
>David Kirkby wrote:
>> Triffid wrote:

>> Heat is also a big issue in SS20 - especially the HyperSPARC CPUs.

>> I bought an Ultra 60 with a single 360MHz CPU and 128MB ram for just
>> over 100 UK pounds a few weeks ago off eBay. Why waste money upgraiding
>> an SS20 when you can get a U60 for that money? U30's are even cheaper.
>> U5's and 10's seem to go for a bit more, but do have the advantage of
>> requiring cheaper IDE disks.

>Thanks, I wasn't aware of the HyperSPARC heat and performance issues. I

Performance profile depends also on _what_ you're doing. A 55MHz
HyperSPARC easily out-runs a 40MHz SuperSPARC; by much more than the
clock speed ratio.

>recently inherited a pile of SS10s & 20s and was considering selling
>some or trading for faster processors, but since there are already
>several double-width 75Mhz SuperSPARC boards in the collection I think
>I'll just assemble a couple of 'loaded' SS20s and save my upgrade
>dollars to spend on second CPUs for my U2s.

>Will heat be an issue if I run 4x75s in SS20s? Solutions?

Too hot... Bigger chassis and cooling fans.
A 150MHz single HyperSPARC gets too hot to touch. Probably produces
in excess of 60W of heat.

HyperSPARC also allow you to have different speed in each MBus slot.
I have a system with 55 and 150MHz processors.

UltraSPARC is of course faster.
--
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ / ASCII ribbon campaign | I'm a .signature virus!
X against HTML mail | Copy me into your ~/.signature
/ \ and postings | to help me spread!

Triffid wrote:

> Will heat be an issue if I run 4x75s in SS20s? Solutions?

Someone else has said they will run too hot, and I can well believe
that, although with attention to cooling, you might be okay. I would not
like to say for sure.

However, if you are willing to remove the side panels, you can get a lot
better cooling. I believe there is a special side panel made, with extra
wide slots to allow more cooling air. I have 5 SS20's and one definitely
has wider slots, allowing more air flow. I think if you look on the Sun
hardware site, you will find it has another part number. I'm not
suggesting you buy one of course, but just mentioning that there is a
way to improve airflow. The easiest is to remove the panel, which lowers
the air restriction.

I wrote some notes on cooling of SS20's here. Might be worth a read - at
the minute the page is not linked from anywhere, so you probably wont
find in with google.

http://www.g8wrb.org/useful-stuff/Su...ARCstation-20/

BTW, if you have a pile of SS20's, and they don't all have the sbus
slots covers on (often they are missing on old machines), watch where
you store them. I had such a machine in my garage, which the mice seem
to like in the winter. One of more of them decided to use the SS20 as a
toilet!!! I tried carefully cleaning the motherboard, but without being
able to get it to work. So I tried more vigorous cleaning, again without
success. So finally I removed everything from the chassis (except the
motherboard), and dumped the whole thing into the bath and went at it
quite vigorously with a tooth brush. Much to my surprise, it then
worked. So I am very careful about storing SS20's in my garage - I make
sure there is no way for little mice to use it as a toilet again.

On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 22:14:44 +0000, David Kirkby wrote:
> Triffid wrote:
>
>> While I'm here, how much difference do Ross 200Mhz processors make to an
>> SS20?
>
> Depends what you start with of course!
>
>> Could I expect performance equivalent to a 360Mhz Ultra 5 if I
>> installed two?
>
> No
>
>> Four?
>
> No.
>
> The HyperSPARCs are pretty useless CPUs really. I have a couple of pairs
> of 125 MHz ones, and I rekon a pair of 125's is about the same speed
> as a pair of 75 MHz SuperSPARCs. In fact, if anything, the latter are
> faster. Remember UltraSPARCs are better than SuperSPARCs and run at much
> higher clock rates. HyperSPARCs seem a dead loss to me.

I second David's observation, with similar comparisons: quad 125MHz (256KB
cache per CPU) Ross vs. dual 75MHz SuperSPARC (1MB cache per CPU). The
quad Ross seems sluggish by comparison. Ostensibly a 100-125 MHz Ross
should be equivalent to 75MHz SuperSPARC but the aggregates don't seem to
scale in that ratio. My suspicion is that the smaller cache starves the
CPUs and all 4 CPUs choke the MBus, but that's conjecture. IMO the "sweet
spot" for Sparc-20s is dual SM71s (75 MHz SuperSPARC 1MB cache). I bought
some recently on eBay for US$10 each. You might find some 85MHz CPUs (will
cost more) for marginally better performance at considerably more heat.
Some will ask for $50, but wait for the $10 ones. I also agree high speed
Ross CPUs are defintely not worth it viz. performance/price. The only
rationale might be if you absolutely HAVE to have some for your museum.

> To be honest, as someone who likes SS20's (I have 5), their day is past.
> A low end Ultra 5/10 or 30 will knock the spots off an SS20. I would not
> consider upgrading an SS20, other than to put a larger disk in it.

Wow! That's more than me. I fire them up now and then, for nostalgia.
Might replace some 83MHz Pentium Overdrive machines with them. I think
they can still work as email servers, news servers, file servers, etc.
However, I tend to wring the last drop out of my gear. YMMV

>> Any reason to prefer the twin processor boards over
>> singles, aside from the twins consuming an SBUS slot?

Just space AFAIK. Maybe bigger cache on twin boards? Dunno.

> I don't know if 200's are available as single width boards. In fact, I'm
> not 100% sure if its actually possible to fit 4x200 MHz in an SS20. I
> know you can fit 4x150's, but I'm not sure about any higher.

Yikes! Quad 200s would certainly be a fire-breathing monster! viz. heat,
not necessarily performance. Last I saw even eBay prices for those CPUs
were prohibitive ($1000s?!? not worth it). There have been some 180MHz
Ross with 1MB cache (I believe?) which would be interesting to try, but
probably too expensive for idle curiosity.

> Heat is also a big issue in SS20 - especially the HyperSPARC CPUs.

I haven't noticed it being a big issue, but it does not get hot around
here. Do keep the vents clean! I started to observe "funny behaviour" when
power supply vents got clogged with dust bunnies. Preventative cleaning!

> I bought an Ultra 60 with a single 360MHz CPU and 128MB ram for just
> over 100 UK pounds a few weeks ago off eBay. Why waste money upgraiding
> an SS20 when you can get a U60 for that money? U30's are even cheaper.
> U5's and 10's seem to go for a bit more, but do have the advantage of
> requiring cheaper IDE disks.

Good price! I happen to like Ultra2s. Can't quite afford any U80s.

Viz. IDE disks: dunno, my PC workstation gets "constipated" now and then
doing IDE I/O (even ATA100), then don't seem to do multiple I/Os very well.

--
Juhan Leemet
Logicognosis, Inc.

Juhan Leemet wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 22:14:44 +0000, David Kirkby wrote:

>>The HyperSPARCs are pretty useless CPUs really. I have a couple of pairs
>> of 125 MHz ones, and I rekon a pair of 125's is about the same speed
>>as a pair of 75 MHz SuperSPARCs. In fact, if anything, the latter are
>>faster. Remember UltraSPARCs are better than SuperSPARCs and run at much
>>higher clock rates. HyperSPARCs seem a dead loss to me.
>
>
> IMO the "sweet
> spot" for Sparc-20s is dual SM71s (75 MHz SuperSPARC 1MB cache).

That's nice to know. Here's my main webserver:- just what you ordered!!

webserver2 # psrinfo -v
Status of processor 0 as of: 11/02/2004 22:06:27
Processor has been on-line since 10/16/2004 20:27:07.
The sparc processor operates at 75 MHz,
and has a sparc floating point processor.
Status of processor 2 as of: 11/02/2004 22:06:27
Processor has been on-line since 10/16/2004 20:27:11.
The sparc processor operates at 75 MHz,
and has a sparc floating point processor.

I have another with idential CPUs.

> I also agree high speed
> Ross CPUs are defintely not worth it viz. performance/price. The only
> rationale might be if you absolutely HAVE to have some for your museum.

I really don't see the logic. What people pay for high end HyperSPARCs
is silly really.

>>To be honest, as someone who likes SS20's (I have 5), their day is past.
>>A low end Ultra 5/10 or 30 will knock the spots off an SS20. I would not
>>consider upgrading an SS20, other than to put a larger disk in it.
>
>
> Wow! That's more than me. I fire them up now and then, for nostalgia.

I have one an SS20 web server, with quite a few domains on it.

http://www.g8wrb.org/
http://www.southminster-branch-line.org.uk/
http://www.althorne.org/
http://www.keeblebrothers.co.uk/
http://www.drkirkby.co.uk/
(plus several more I can't be bothered to list).

I keep another with identical information on it, so if the SS20 was to
fail, I can switch over to the backup in seconds. The other 3 SS20's are
not used much, but I used to use them for testing software on various
operating systems.


> Might replace some 83MHz Pentium Overdrive machines with them. I think
> they can still work as email servers, news servers, file servers, etc.

Yes sure. Even as low end web servers. I only have an ADSL link (64-256
kbit/s on upload), so performance of those sites above will pretty much
always be limited by network bandwidth, not CPU time.

> However, I tend to wring the last drop out of my gear. YMMV

They are fine for what I use them for. I was not trying to imply they
are not fine machines, but I think they are past the point of worth
upgrading. I guess CPUs for $10 might make sense, but I would not spend
that to change from 75 to 85 MHz. Especially by the time you add carriage.

BTW, there are some SuperSPARC CPUs with 2MB cache, which will work in
an SS20, but only 1MB gets used.

>>I don't know if 200's are available as single width boards. In fact, I'm
>>not 100% sure if its actually possible to fit 4x200 MHz in an SS20. I
>>know you can fit 4x150's, but I'm not sure about any higher.
>
>
> Yikes! Quad 200s would certainly be a fire-breathing monster! viz. heat,
> not necessarily performance.

I have noticed the kernel time is quite high with hypersparcs. Cache
consistency is always a problem with multi-processor machines, but
multi-processor HyperSPARCs (I have before run 4x125) waste a lot of time.

One thing to watch with the HyperSPARCs is the nylon nuts and bolts used
to hold the heatsinks on (at least on my 125 MHz units, can become very
brittle if they get too hot.

I did some careful checking with a meter, and decided I could replace
all the bolts with metal ones, as long as a nylon washer was under one,
as a track on the PCB was too close. They work fine with metal.


> Last I saw even eBay prices for those CPUs
> were prohibitive ($1000s?!? not worth it). There have been some 180MHz
> Ross with 1MB cache (I believe?) which would be interesting to try, but
> probably too expensive for idle curiosity.

There must be some mugs out there paying $1000. I suspect the bigger
caches would push the percentage of kernel time up even more, which
seems to be a problem with HyperSPARCs to me.

>>I bought an Ultra 60 with a single 360MHz CPU and 128MB ram for just
>>over 100 UK pounds a few weeks ago off eBay. Why waste money upgraiding
>>an SS20 when you can get a U60 for that money? U30's are even cheaper.
>>U5's and 10's seem to go for a bit more, but do have the advantage of
>>requiring cheaper IDE disks.
>
>
> Good price!

A guy on eBay had a lot of them. Some had 256MB. In fact, some lucky
person got his with 256MB for a bit less than I paid for mine with 128.
I bought one as a backup for the U80 - CPUs and disk would swap between
the two. And 64MB ram modules from SS20's fit the U60 too, so owning
SS20s and a U80, made the U60 a great spare machine.

> I happen to like Ultra2s. Can't quite afford any U80s.

I've never had a U2 - Had IPC, IPX, SS4, SS5, SS20, U30, U60 and U80's,
but never a U1, U2, U5 or U10.

I do have a U80 (4x450, 4GB RAM). U80's seem to hold their price
*reasonably* well, although I hate to think what I have lost on mine
since I bought it !!!

U30's seem to be pretty cheap.

> Viz. IDE disks: dunno, my PC workstation gets "constipated" now and then
> doing IDE I/O (even ATA100), then don't seem to do multiple I/Os very well.

SCSI clearly is better, but it is expensive. I've seen *used* 36 GB
disks go on eBay for little more than the price of a *new* 200 GB IDE
one. That is one hell of a difference in price.

I have all SCSI here - SS20's, the U60, the U80, IBM RS/6000, SCI
Octane, HP C3000. The DEC Alpha has a SCSI disk, but I did borrow a 120
GB IDE one and found it worked okay. The CD-ROM is IDE on the Dec Alpha.
But its a long time since I switched that on.

But I must admit, if I bought a new PC now for home use, I would not pay
the extra for SCSI. I'd go for IDE, just because of the price.

There is another advantage with SCSI too - reliability. I have a
relative who seems to spend all his time downloading CD+DVDs, and
converting to MP3 or whatever. This is highly disk intensive. He was
always replacing disks. Although the manufacturers would replace them,
he was getting rather fed up every 3-6 months or so having to replace
disks. I suggested he used SCSI, which solved it for him. I just don't
think IDE disks are made as well as SCSI ones, so can't take months of
continuous activity, whereas SCSI disks, which are often used in
servers, can take it a lot better.