From: Christopher Croughton Message-Id: <97Sep17.151232gmt+0100.11654@internet01.amc.de> Subject: Re: ClosedDOS??? To: ark AT mpak DOT convey DOT ru Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 14:17:22 +0100 Cc: crough45 AT amc DOT de, opendos AT delorie DOT com In-Reply-To: <352@mpak.convey.ru> from "-= ArkanoiD =-" at Sep 16, 97 10:57:51 pm Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk -= ArkanoiD =- wrote: > > a) Not twice,just ~+20%. b) There is _significant_ improvement over EIDE.. > It saves CPU cycles - and when it comes to swap.. I have a EIDE linux machine - > it looks terrible being compared with nearly similar SCSI one. I get load > level ~3 on first one and ~1.1 on second with the same conditions. I guess I'm biased - compared to a DEC AlphaStation with 166 MHz processor, running OSF/1, my PC with a P166 and EIDE drive goes goes like lightning anyway. (Prices I've seen for SCSI, you're paying a large amount for the controller plus the 20% or so extra for the disk, which makes the combined price near double that of an EIDE drive. Locally I can get a 4.3Mb EIDE for under DM500, a SCSI equivalent is around DM650 and the controller around DM400. It's twice the price to me; if I had a SCSI controller already it would be nearer your 20% figure). > ..and.. 7 is more than 2 (or 14 is more than 4). Sorry, I miss the referrent. I'll agree with the numeric comparisons (since I don't run an early-model Pentium!), but why? > and SCSI is not just a disk subsystem,it is general purpose peripherial > interface. And it exists beyond PC world. Being non-PC is irrelevant to me, I don't expect to use my peripherals with anything else. I haven't seen any peripherals I want with only SCSI interfaces recently (almost all CD and writable CD devices are IDE now), and those I would like are far beyond my budget (the big tape streamers, for instance). Chris C