Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!jarthur!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jpl-devvax!huey!brad
From: brad@huey.Jpl.Nasa.GOV (Brad Hines)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: Severe performance degradation with 386 enhanced mode, any tips?
Message-ID: <11116@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV>
Date: 19 Jan 91 02:13:42 GMT
References: <1991Jan16.224240.14201@news.iastate.edu> <1991Jan17.234310.6393@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> <6219@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> <1991Jan18.174333.28178@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> <966@venice.SEDD.TRW.COM>
Sender: news@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV
Reply-To: brad@huey.Jpl.Nasa.GOV
Organization: JPL Spatial Interferometry Group
Lines: 40

In article <966@venice.SEDD.TRW.COM>, press@venice.SEDD.TRW.COM (Barry Press) writes:
|> 
|> I tried it as well, and find that although I can make the system work (but 
|> don't load smartdrv high, cause it locks up my system), it drastically slows
|> down my disk.  For instance, SI reports disk speed of 8.5, but if I simply
|> put in QEMM vs. HIMEM, it goes down to 6.2.  Worse yet, calls to Quarterdeck
|> helped not a bit.  Admittedly, the SCSI disk I've got is not your usual setup,
|> and there are interactions between the disk driver and qemm (but both Adaptec 
|> and QDK say they work together), but losing 25% of disk performance for 25K or
|> so of memory (can't load smartdrive high, and QDK says in general this probably
|> doesn't work) just isn't worth it.
|> 
|> -- 
|> Barry Press                                 Internet: press@venice.sedd.trw.com


Although Microsoft seems to promise doom and destruction if you use anything
but smartdrive, I quickly decided that smartdrive was still slow (like previous
versions) when I started using win 3.0.  I now use pc-cache from pc-tools 6.0,
and it seems much faster (purely subjective measurement here).  I have used this
configuration now since about a week after I got Windows back in June with
no ill effects.  And pc-cache can load hi if you have enough memory up there.
pc-cache from pc-tools 5.5 is somewhat smaller and will almost surely fit
in your high memory, but I haven't tested it much with windows.  I like the
ability of pc-cache 6.0 to cache writes; this too has worked flawlessly since
June.

The resident sizes of both pc-cache 5.5 and 6.0 are similar, but the size of
version 6.0 when first loaded is rather large (>60K as I recall) but then it ends
up occupying only 20-30K.

-- 
Brad Hines
Internet: brad@huey.jpl.nasa.gov

JPL 169-214
4800 Oak Grove Drive
Pasadena, CA  91107
USA
818-354-2465