Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!oberon!pollux.usc.edu!papa From: papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: A2090 controller Message-ID: <7992@oberon.USC.EDU> Date: 30 Mar 88 22:16:26 GMT References: <2911@leo.UUCP> Sender: news@oberon.USC.EDU Reply-To: papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) Organization: Felsina Software, Los Angeles, CA Lines: 33 In article <2911@leo.UUCP| harald@leo.UUCP ( Harald Milne) writes: | For reasons I can't understand, (and I do understand the reasons |for SCSI speed improvements) the A2090 seems do better. My A2000 has |a very snappy response compared to the A1000 with SCSI. With all things |being equal (like number of top level directories, diskbuffers, etc) |and things being unequal (SCSI track buffering, average access times) |this is really strange. | I don't have any notion of A2090 SCSI performance, so I can't even |even talk about this, but considering the supposed performance advantages |of SCSI against the A2090 controller with a slow access (40ms) 251 drive, |I'll be dammed if the A2090 doesn't kick ass so to speak. As if the A2090 |provides SCSI performanc with an ordinary ST506. (Quite possible) | | I don't know, and I don't have hard numbers, but the A2090 really |kicks. | Needless to say, I'm impressed with the A2090 controller in this |configuration. | | Any comments? I have your same configuration (A2090 and ST251) and I concur completely with your assessment. Even more. I have partitioned the ST251 with an FFS (Fast File System) partition (1.3 Gamma). Icons come up from that partition AS FAST AS from the 1.3 C-A Recoverable RAM Disk. Note that I DON't have the "fast" 28msec ST251-1, but the "slow" ST251 (40 msec). -- Marco Papa -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= uucp:...!pollux!papa BIX:papa ARPAnet:pollux!papa@oberon.usc.edu "There's Alpha, Beta, Gamma and Diga!" -- Leo Schwab [quoting Rick Unland] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=