Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.linux:39073 comp.os.386bsd.questions:2498 comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:2789 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!sgiblab!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!uunet!pipex!uknet!zaphod.axion.bt.co.uk!lessen From: lessen@axion.bt.co.uk (Lee Essen) Newsgroups: comp.os.linux,comp.os.386bsd.questions,comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit Subject: Re: IDE vs SCSI and performance Date: 17 May 1993 14:50:06 GMT Organization: BT Laboratories Lines: 20 Distribution: world Message-ID: <1t88mu$l3@zaphod.axion.bt.co.uk> References: <1993May13.182917.23510@mav.com> <C72CAw.B47@sugar.NeoSoft.COM> NNTP-Posting-Host: jammy.axion.bt.co.uk In article <C72CAw.B47@sugar.NeoSoft.COM>, peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva) writes: |> I was talking to a fellow in a computer store the other day, and he was |> insisting that he was getting 2.5 MB/s on his IDE drives under AmigaOS, |> over twice what he got with SCSI. |> |> I found that hard to beleive... I suspected that his benchmark was being |> messed up by buffering. |> -- |> Peter da Silva. <peter@sugar.neosoft.com>. |> `-_-' Har du kramat din varg idag? |> 'U` |> "Det er min ledsager, det er ikke drikkepenge." I'm using and IDE drive and (three) SCSI drive's on my NetBSD system now, this is with a 'multifunction-dont-get-much-cheaper-than-this' IDE controller (12 pounds) and a 'the-lowest-of-the-low' Seagate ST02 scsi controller, after completly hacking (read: optimisation) the driver (thanks to Glen Overby) the SCSI drives are *much* (very technical term) quicker than the IDE. Lee.