Article View: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Article #11813Hard Drive caches
From: pv9955
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 19:15
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 19:15
23 lines
1482 bytes
1482 bytes
I am running HyperDisk on my computer, and Smartdrv 4.0 on my mother's computer. I also have NCache with Norton Utils 6.01. I have never seen a report on software drive caches, so I do not know how these three caches compare to each other. I really cannot compare how Smartdrv and HyperDisk perform, because the hard drive in my mom's computer is considerably better than mine. And when I try to compare Smartdrv with HyperDisk on my computer, I really cannot "feel" any major differences. However, I like the HyperDisk interface better. Does anybody know which of these three is "supposedly" the "best" or fastest drive cache ? How compatible are they with most software ? (I know that HyperDisk does not like QEMM386, but I am not running that, so I do not care). I would eventually like to get Stacker 3.0 (or DOS 6.0) and I would like to know how any of these caches will work with Stacker. And before I get Stacker, should I keep using HyperDisk, of is NCache or Smartdrv actually "better" ? Any opinions would be appreciated. Please EMail responses. Thanks, Peter Volpe PV9955@albnyvms.bitnet
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1993Jan23.191506.12854@sarah.albany.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!usc!rpi!sarah!uacsc1!PV9955Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!usc!rpi!sarah!uacsc1!PV9955 From: pv9955@uacsc1 Subject: Hard Drive caches Message-ID: <1993Jan23.191506.12854@sarah.albany.edu> Sender: news@sarah.albany.edu (News Administrator) Reply-To: pv9955@uacsc1 Organization: University of Albany, SUNY Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 19:15:06 GMT Lines: 23