🚀 go-pugleaf

Eric van Bezooijen <eric@godzilla.berkeley.edu> wrote in article
<66hsvc$i7p@masters0.InterNex.Net>...
> In article <66dmbn$oj3@mtinsc02.worldnet.att.net>,
> Ron Reaugh <Ron-Reaugh@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >John Kotches <jkotches@pobox.com> wrote in article
> ><34899966.B65AB640@pobox.com>...
> >> Ron Reaugh wrote:
> >> > 
> >> > Jason <jneus@prodigy.net> wrote in article
> >> > <34824337.CAA79322@prodigy.net>...
> 
> [ lossy compression ]
> 
> >> You keep making these claims about how great EIDE is.  Would you
> >> mind pointing us towards some benchmarks which validate your
> >> claims?  As it is, you're statements are just words on the screen
> >> with no backup to establish validity to them.
> >
> >See:  http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Peaks/9892/nt4.htm
> 
> Hmm, I read that, and my interpretation of those benchmarks is that
> IDE drives use twice as much of your CPU during a disk operation.  I'm
> glad I have SCSI in my system!

Go read it again.  The CPU utilization for EIDE was low about 4% MB/sec.
which is equivalent to what SCSI would do on an >equivalent system<.  CPU
utilization is higher on a slow CPU than on a fast CPU for either SCSI or
EIDE.

Regards,

Ron Reaugh