Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!ginosko!uunet!zephyr!tektronix!psueea!parsely!agora!foil!john
From: john@foil.UUCP (John Cavanaugh)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: scsi rll trade off questions?
Message-ID: <226.24BC1A13@foil.UUCP>
Date: 13 Jul 89 03:47:05 GMT
Organization: GT<->Usenet Test System - Portland, Oregon
Lines: 31


>In an earlier article byronl@copper.MDP.TEK.COM (Byron Lunz) writes:
>>In article <14978@ut-emx.UUCP> allred@ut-emx.UUCP (Kevin L. Allred) 
>writes:
>>>...Segate has recently started marketing a
>>>low cost SCSI addaptor (ST01 and ST02) suitable for use with its
>>>ST296N 80MB hard disk.  This combination reportedly offeres about 750
>>>KB/sec transfer rate, which is comparable to the 1:1 interleve RLL
>>>transfer rate, and it is more cost effective.  Apparently the SCSI
>>
>>I received my new Gateway 2000 386/20 a few days ago.  It arrived with
>>a Seagate ST296N and SCSI controller (not sure of the model #).
>>Spintest and Coretest 2.7 gave me data transfer rates of 440-460KB/sec!
>>
>>If someone out there is 
>>actually seeing transfer rates around or over 800KB/sec, I'd sure
>>like to hear about it.
>>

So would I.  Last night I installed a ST02 ST296N in my Dell System 200
(286/12.5) and was suprised to see that my ST251-0 was constantly clocking
faster access times than the SCSI.  Using Coretest 2.7, I was getting
somewhere around 28-29ms for the 251 [who knows, maybe the people at Dell
were confused and gave me the 251-1...] and about 32-33ms for the 296.
I also got about 440KB/sec data transfer rate.  Strange.

The one thing that I thought might be the holdup was the 8-bit card (ST02)
that I installed with the drive.  Does Seagate make a 16-bit SCSI adaptor?

--  
John Cavanaugh - via GT<->Usenet Test System - Portland, Oregon 
UUCP: ...!tektronix!tessi!agora!foil!john  --  GT Net/Node: 056/002