4 ms·
I remember saving up my cash to buy an Adaptec 2940 and a 9GB SCSI drive, getting it working and finding it...not noticeably faster than whatever ATA/133 drive
by bluedino 3y ago
I remember saving up my cash to buy an Adaptec 2940 and a 9GB SCSI drive, getting it working and finding it...not noticeably faster than whatever ATA/133 drive I had at the time.
Which of course, I could have bought three more of for what I spent.
- threatripper 3y agoBut the 2940 supports up to 7 devices and you could add more drives to improve performance. If you have /, /home, and /usr on a separate drive you get a significant reduction in latency which improves your work efficiency.
- bzzzt 3y agoTried that back in the days, burnt out my power supply. Those 10k SCSI drives used a fair amount of electricity especially while starting up...
- bzzzt 3y agoYou were too late ;), by the time ATA/133 was standard almost all drives supported (Ultra)DMA which meant the host CPU didn't have to 'bit bang' the data anymore. The fastest drives (Seagate Cheetah) did 15K RPM which reduced access time noticeably. Also made a noise like a jet engine though.
- justsomehnguy 3y agoYou took the words out of my mouth. ATA/133 is ~2001 for the drives of 20/40/80Gb. It's a bit too late for a 9Gb drive to show the merits.