Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!cbmvax!jesup
From: jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com (Randell Jesup)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.hardware
Subject: Re: Is the A3000 Really Worth Buying? An honest question.
Message-ID: <22027@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Date: 30 May 91 02:08:13 GMT
References: <377X24w162w@alchemy.tcnet.ithaca.ny.us> <1991May23.144823.16337@casbah.acns.nwu.edu> <21895@cbmvax.commodore.com> <126433@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> <22004@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Reply-To: jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com (Randell Jesup)
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA
Lines: 16

In article <22004@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes:
>The A2500/30 will run CPU intensive stuff nearly as fast as the A3000.  The
>two main problems are disk and memory.  Disk speed will be almost as fast,
>but the system throughput during disk activity will be much less.

	An example: when playing with the ST1480N (400+MB 4400 rpm drive),
we found that Diskspeed said 1.5 MB/s for the center of the disk on an
A2500/030 plus 2091, and said 1.7 MB/s for an A3000.  That was the first
time I had noticed a difference of that sort.  (BTW, that drive does 2MB/s
on the outer tracks.)  Note: this was a signifigantly non-scientific test.

-- 
Randell Jesup, Jack-of-quite-a-few-trades, Commodore Engineering.
{uunet|rutgers}!cbmvax!jesup, jesup@cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com  BIX: rjesup  
Disclaimer: Nothing I say is anything other than my personal opinion.
"No matter where you go, there you are."  - Buckaroo Banzai