Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!bagate!cbmvax!cbmehq!cbmdeo!adspdk!hclausen
From: hclausen@adspdk.CBMNET (Henrik Clausen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.hardware
Subject: Re: 2090A versus 2091
Message-ID: <18020b28.ARN03431@adspdk.CBMNET>
Date: 6 Oct 90 20:18:32 GMT
References: <kpicott.653574148@sapporo>
Reply-To: hclausen@adspdk.CBMNET
Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga.hardware
Organization: Graffiti Data
Lines: 31

In article <kpicott.653574148@sapporo>, Socrates writes:

> Can anyone explain in a nutshell what the differences between the 2090A and
> the 2091 are?  (My dealer says "Oh yes,  big BIIIIG differences.  Lotsa
> differences.  Yes definitely.".  -- Not very useful.)

   Well, he's right. All new design. And it's a hardcard.

   To put it briefly:

   The DMA contention problem is gone. There might still be delays, but no fake
R/W errors.

   SCSI-direct is implemented. Means you can hook your tape streamer to it, and
other nice devices.

   SCSI is a lot faster. I'm getting reads of 763K/second.

   The old 2090 was a very early SCSI design. 2091 is a fresh one, and the drive
is a Quantum. I wonder why they kept such a similar name on the controller?

> remainder of my problems might go away by up(?)grading to the 2091.

   Quite likely, but I can't answer that for sure.

   The 2091 is a design that will keep you happy for years to come.

                                          Have a nice day            -Henrik
|            Henrik Clausen, Graffiti Data (Fido: 2:230/22.33)           |
|           ...{pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmehq!adspdk!hclausen           |
\__"Do not accept the heart that is the slave to reason" - Qawwali trad__/