From owner-freebsd-hardware Sun Feb 20 15:34:53 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mail.rz.fh-wilhelmshaven.de (mail.rz.fh-wilhelmshaven.de [139.13.25.134]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1358D37C027 for ; Sun, 20 Feb 2000 15:34:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from ohoyer@fbwi.fh-wilhelmshaven.de) Received: from fettesau.stuwo.fh-wilhelmshaven.de (stuwopc5.stuwo.fh-wilhelmshaven.de [139.13.209.5]) by mail.rz.fh-wilhelmshaven.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id AAA17904; Mon, 21 Feb 2000 00:34:33 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <4.1.20000221002928.009bb930@mail.rz.fh-wilhelmshaven.de> X-Sender: ohoyer@mail.rz.fh-wilhelmshaven.de X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 00:34:55 +0100 To: Andreas Klemm From: Olaf Hoyer Subject: Re: separate udma66 controller possible, when only having udma33 bios Cc: freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <20000220213711.A62313@titan.klemm.gtn.com> References: <4.1.20000220202241.009539a0@mail.rz.fh-wilhelmshaven.de> <20000220190651.A27410@titan.klemm.gtn.com> <4.1.20000220202241.009539a0@mail.rz.fh-wilhelmshaven.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org >> But to run UDMA/66, you also need the special 80-wire cabling, > >Well, then I'll have to buy an 80-wire cable tomorrow as well. Hi! Well, only needed when using a separate controller like the Promise. If you decide to take the on-board controller than you could use every "el cheapo" 40-pin cable... > >> but unless you are not having some more of that beasts in your >> machine, there will be no big difference to UDMA/33. > >The Maxtor 54098U8 will be the only EIDE device in the machine. >So would it be satisfactory, to run it with the on board EIDE >controller ??? But you also told me, that the CPU utilization >is less with UDMA/66. So ... if I want to save some CPU cycles, >should I nevertheless use UDMA/66 ?! Well, if you use it as single drive, even the difference in CPU cycles won't probably make up significantly in user-visible manner. Yes, for benchmarks, it would show a slightly faster operation, but in real life, there should be no real improvement. Regards Olaf Hoyer -------- Olaf Hoyer www.nightfire.de mailto:Olaf.Hoyer@nightfire.de FreeBSD- Turning PC's into workstations ICQ:22838075 Liebe und Hass sind nicht blind, aber geblendet vom Feuer, dass sie selber mit sich tragen. (Nietzsche) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hardware" in the body of the message