Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 20:36:16 +0100 From: Bob Bishop <rb@gid.co.uk> To: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: lousy disk perf. under cpu load (was IDE vs SCSI) Message-ID: <l03020901b03a034f0cc3@[194.32.164.2]> In-Reply-To: <19970908114806.25653@lemis.com> References: <199709080134.SAA09715@MindBender.serv.net>; from Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com on Sun, Sep 07, 1997 at 06:34:18PM -0700 <341344B3.57D10484@kew.com> <199709080134.SAA09715@MindBender.serv.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 3:18 +0100 8/9/97, Greg Lehey wrote: >On Sun, Sep 07, 1997 at 06:34:18PM -0700, Michael L. VanLoon -- >HeadCandy.com wrote: >[...] >> Unfortunately, the extra quality and performance that SCSI can >> potentially bring, commonly comes at a higher price. > >The annoying thing is that the price isn't that much higher. It's >just because the volume market is (E)IDE that the prices difference is >exaggerated. In the UK at least, it pays to check prices of SCSI drives with the Macmongers; prices tend to be much closer to (E)IDE levels because they shift a *much* higher proportion of SCSI. -- Bob Bishop (0118) 977 4017 international code +44 118 rb@gid.co.uk fax (0118) 989 4254 between 0800 and 1800 UK
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?l03020901b03a034f0cc3>