From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Dec 22 10:57:53 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mercury.gfit.net (ns.gfit.net [209.41.124.90]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5873615537 for ; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 10:57:49 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tom@embt.com) Received: from PARANOR (timembt.iinc.com [206.67.169.229]) by mercury.gfit.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id NAA19233; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 13:04:41 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from tom@embt.com) Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19991222135738.014684a0@mail.embt.com> X-Sender: tembt@mail.embt.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 13:57:38 -0500 To: Arcady Genkin From: Tom Embt Subject: Re: One drive much slower than another Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <87vh5s59yk.fsf@main.wgaf.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Correct me if I'm wrong here, but doesn't your Bigfoot have a couple years advantage over the WD? RPMs are fine but there are lots of other things that affect disk performance which often get overlooked. The Bigfoot probably has much higher areal and track density than the old Caviar. For example, IBM's IDE Deskstar drives have gone through several "generations", including: ?? DHEA DTTA DJNA DPTA with the last three all being available in both 5400 and 7200RPM versions. Sequention I/O performance varies *greatly* between different ends of the scale. Tom Embt tom@embt.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message