Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!rochester!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!tekcrl!tekgvs!keithe
From: keithe@tekgvs.TEK.COM (Keith Ericson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Formatting a Hard Disk (changing interleave, response)
Message-ID: <2503@tekgvs.TEK.COM>
Date: Thu, 30-Jul-87 20:22:22 EDT
Article-I.D.: tekgvs.2503
Posted: Thu Jul 30 20:22:22 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 1-Aug-87 15:41:59 EDT
References: <1604@bellcore.bellcore.com> <553@cup.portal.com> <796@homxc.UUCP>
Reply-To: keithe@tekgvs.UUCP (Keith Ericson)
Distribution: world
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton, OR.
Lines: 20

In article <796@homxc.UUCP> rps@homxc.UUCP (R.SHARPLES) writes:
>For example: an ST225 w/WD controller with 1:3 interleave on a PC6300 
>will have a transfer rate of about 25Kb/sec.  With 1:4 the transfer
>rate will rise to about 160Kb/sec.

On my 8MHz, no-wait-state 286 AT Clone I get essentially these same
transfer rates but at interleaves of 1:2 (29 KBytes/sec) and 1:3
(162 Kbytes/sec).

I'm in the process of evaluating Western Digital's WD-1006-WAH which
has track-buffering and can do a 1:1 interleave. The one I had (but
returned for other reasons) moved data in/out at 448 KBytes/sec. At
that point it's competitive with a RAM-drive. Well, almost... :-)
A drawback with the WD_1006-WAH is that it is only a hard-disk-drive
controller, and requires the use of a separate floppy controller. My
WD rep sez that an updated version is due out RSN that combines both
onot a single card. I'll let you know... PS - price is not
outrageously greater than a run-of-the-mill WD-1003-WA2 (or clone).

keith