Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!texbell!swbatl!ammrk
From: ammrk@swbatl.sbc.com (Mike R. Kraml)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.hardware
Subject: Re: SetCPU and the 2091
Keywords: SetCPU, 2091
Message-ID: <1243@swbatl.sbc.com>
Date: 11 Mar 90 21:15:38 GMT
References: <11051@june.cs.washington.edu>
Reply-To: ammrk@swbatl.UUCP (Mike R. Kraml)
Organization: Southwestern Bell Tele. Co. - Advanced Technology Lab - St. Louis
Lines: 32

In article <11051@june.cs.washington.edu> dylan@june.cs.washington.edu (Dylan McNamee) writes:
>
>Thanks to many people on the net, here is a SetCPU file entry for using 
>CardROM option with the 2091:
>
>0x202 0x03 0x10000 0x2000 0x3FFF CBM_2091_SCSI_Controller
>
>These are, in order, Manufacturer, Product (may be 0x02, use Dave Haynie's
>CacheCard Program to check,) Card size, Base Address of ROM, size of ROM.
>
>I found the size of the ROM by guessing and checking.  The system crashed
>when I was wrong.  Be sure to use the verbose option of setcpu, to be sure
>your file was accepted, and always use the cardrom option along with the
>Fastrom option.
>
>Now for the wierd part;  I'm not getting _any_ performance improvement.
>It's about 382K/sec Reads, and 335K/sec Writes (32KBits at a time) using
>DiskSpeed.  Has anyone had any better luck?  About what should I be getting?
>Anyone?  Anyone?
 NO! I did the same for my 2090a without any real improvments.  I think I got
 3k per second improvments on the top end (about 460k/sec with buffering, vs
 457k/sec), but they were minor to say the least.  
>
>dylan mcnamee
>dylan@cs.washington.edu

Just thought I would put in my 2 cents worth.  Take it easy, Mike...
-- 
 =============================================================================
  Mike Kraml - Manager-Separations MECHANIZATION - SWBT - (The Techies)
  UUCP: {uunet, bellcore, texbell}...!swbatl!slims!ammrk   
 =============================================================================