From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Mar 22 01:10:12 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id BAA27729 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 22 Mar 1995 01:10:12 -0800
Received: from star-gate.com (hasty.vip.best.com [204.156.141.143]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id BAA27717; Wed, 22 Mar 1995 01:10:08 -0800
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by star-gate.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id BAA10094; Wed, 22 Mar 1995 01:05:40 GMT
Message-Id: <199503220105.BAA10094@star-gate.com>
X-Authentication-Warning: star-gate.com: Host localhost didn't use HELO protocol
X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6alpha 2/16/95
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@ref.tfs.com>
cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org, faq@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: Why IDE is bad 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 22 Mar 1995 00:58:39 PST."
             <199503220858.AAA04645@ref.tfs.com> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 1995 01:05:37 +0000
From: Amancio Hasty <hasty@star-gate.com>
Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> > > I just made a simple test, this shows why IDE is inferior to SCSI for
> > > FreeBSD:
> > > 
> > > Western Digital 540 Caviar EIDE disk on IDE controller:
> > > -------------------------------------------------------
> > > Quantum Empire 2100 SCSI-II disk on VL-buslogic controller
> > 
> > Do the above drives have similar performance characteristics?
> 
> That is entirely insignificant.  The interesting thing is that
Perhaps this is so ...
However, if the IDE drive is fast your data transfer rate could be 
faster. As for the CPU load, Western Digital drives support DMA. Now don't ask
me if it works or not or which other IDE drives support DMA.

Amancio