Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!uhccux!bt455s39
From: bt455s39@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Carmen Hardina)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix.sco
Subject: Re: If you have Xenix 386, run this for me
Message-ID: <10988@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu>
Date: 17 Jan 91 05:57:26 GMT
References: <1991Jan16.094432.21159@eng.ufl.edu>
Reply-To: bt455s39@uhccux.UUCP (Carmen Hardina)
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Hawaii
Lines: 22

In article <1991Jan16.094432.21159@eng.ufl.edu> jc@joker.mil.ufl.edu (Jim Castleberry) writes:
>As much as I despise benchmark hype, I hate to ask this, but I'm
>looking at a throughput problem and need a reference.
[....]
>controller type, and disk type if you know them.  I expect it to take
>between 10 seconds and 2 minutes.
>
>I have 1 MFM drive and 1 SCSI (on separate controllers).  Both drives
>do only 93k per second out of a possible 400+!  Is Xenix really that
>slow???
>
>Jim Castleberry
>jc@joker.mil.ufl.edu

On an Everex 3000A (386DX/16MHz) running SCO XENIX 386 2.3.2 with an
Adaptec ACB-2372B RLL Hard/Floppy Controller and a Maxtor XT-1140 MFM
Hard Disk (1:1 int., 28ms, 1024 Cyl., 15 Hds., 26 Sec./Trk., 183MB)
it took 35 seconds.  That's approximately 286K per second.  The Adaptec
is rated at about 900K/Sec. and utilities like The Power Meter under
DOS reaffirm that fact.  That's a big difference in speed between the
two operating systems.  BTW, the CPU is rated at 3.4 VAX MIPS has 3MB
of RAM.  Is dd really a reliable way of judging transfer rate?