Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!caen!uflorida!reef.cis.ufl.edu!jdb
From: jdb@reef.cis.ufl.edu (Brian K. W. Hook)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: Re: building a clone: good stuff vs. trash?
Keywords: clone,homebuilt,motherboard
Message-ID: <26973@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU>
Date: 17 Feb 91 16:41:13 GMT
References: <26936@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> <1991Feb15.184449.21942@cs.umn.edu> <1991Feb15.201920.13743@lynx.CS.ORST.EDU>
Sender: news@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU
Organization: UF CIS Dept.
Lines: 22

In article <1991Feb15.201920.13743@lynx.CS.ORST.EDU> lairdt@mist.CS.ORST.EDU (Tom Laird) writes:

>I also would avoid an IDE drive, especially a Seagate. IDE drives are SLOW
>and turn out about 500-600k per second throughput - a bad idea to hook up
>such a slow drive to a fast system.

I don't know where you get those statistics, but I would like to point out
that about 90% of the mail order computer companies use IDE drives because
they are fast, low cost, and reliable.  Northgate, Gateway, Zeos, Dell,
EVERYONE use IDE drives.  I get transfer rates around 800-1000k per second,
and they very inexpensive.

The Seagate and Conner drives are the best for the price.  I personally
have an aversion to Maxtor and Miniscribe.

Also, these companies have IDE drives on their 33mhz and 486 systems.

Your average IDE drive will be arund 20ms with 32K cache, and there are
some down to 15ms, 128K cache, and up to 338MB in size.


Brian