Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!psuvax1!hsdndev!husc6!encore!pinocchio!schwalbe From: schwalbe@pinocchio.Encore.COM (Jim Schwalbe) Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms Subject: Re: difference between smartdrv.sys? Message-ID: <13943@encore.Encore.COM> Date: 29 Jan 91 18:37:34 GMT References: Sender: news@Encore.COM Reply-To: schwalbe@pinocchio.UUCP (Jim Schwalbe) Organization: Encore Computer Corp, Marlboro, MA Lines: 23 Nntp-Posting-Host: pinocchio.encore.com In article hp0p+@andrew.cmu.edu (Hokkun Pang) writes: >what is the difference between the smartdrv.sys from Windows and the one from >MS-DOS 4.01? Someone claimed the one from DOS gives better performance,is that >true? Interestingly enough, it is true. After reading the post (sorry don't remember who posted it so I can't credit you) I went home and tried it. I got about a 20% better transfer rate using the DOS 4.01 version. One thing I noticed is that the DOS 4.01 version cache size is not dynamic, it is of fixed size. The one that comes with windows will change size if the memory is needed by Windows. Another thing worth noting. I am running DOS 3.30 but the DOS 4.01 SMARTDRV.SYS works with 3.30 despite that fact that when I ran the 'strings' filter on SMARTDRV.SYS, I uncovered an error message saying "Incorrect DOS version"????? .---------------------------------------------------------------------------. : Jim Schwalbe .----------------. "Half of what I say is : : Hardware Research Group .--+-------------. | meaningless; but I say it : : Encore Computer Corp. | | E N C O R E | | so that the other half may : : Mail: | `-------------+--' reach you." : : schwalbe@encore.com `----------------' - Kahil Gibran : `---------------------------------------------------------------------------'