I haven't ever noticed a significant difference in drive speed (going from ata 33 / ata 66 / ata 100 etc) without benchmarks until I used my first IDE raid system. That shit will melt the paint of your case.
Hmmmm now I'm starting to get a droop instead of a hardon
Maybe I'm going to have to go and start reading about hard drive specs again.
I thought the ATA drives were just one step from nirvana.
Originally posted by AssFairy Hmmmm now I'm starting to get a droop instead of a hardon
Maybe I'm going to have to go and start reading about hard drive specs again.
I thought the ATA drives were just one step from nirvana.
Just as IDE has, SCSI has also improved it's transfer rate over the years. You should stop looking at the specs for 500mb SCSI drives dude.
My motherboard has built-in IDE-RAID but I haven't taken advantage of it. Outside of benchmarking software, I have seen very little difference between ATA/66, /100 and /133 in practical use.
Originally posted by senseidru A lot of people in this thread don't know the difference between mb and MB. n00bs.
Actually, megabit is Mb, not mb. Seeing as you're being such an anally retentive prick and "correcting" people, i thought i'd return the favour! It's a given that when referring to hard drive capacity and transfer rates, that people are talking in Megabytes. Thanks for playing.
SCSI is faster and more secure and if you want a headache then go for that IDE RAID which is completely unnecessary unless you are skimping on the cash.
Just hold out a little bit and get Serial ATA all the way if you want to avoid SCSI but still want fast access and alot of that goodness like daisy chaining that was previously only available with SCSI.
Not really a surprise that FreeBSD excels even with lower end hardware. Windows can't even use a third of its burst capacity while FreeBSD is nipping at the maximum...
Originally posted by rowan I haven't been too impressed with the higher numbers so far, but probably more because of the OS rather than the hardware...
Not really a surprise that FreeBSD excels even with lower end hardware. Windows can't even use a third of its burst capacity while FreeBSD is nipping at the maximum...
FreeBSD is the utlimate OS, well anyway in my opinion, if you run the new 5.0 hyperthreading on a dual xeon oh my my. As soon as it goes stable thats going on there hell yeah, I think I got hard thinking about it
Actually, megabit is Mb, not mb. Seeing as you're being such an anally retentive prick and "correcting" people, i thought i'd return the favour! It's a given that when referring to hard drive capacity and transfer rates, that people are talking in Megabytes. Thanks for playing.
Chodadog I used to love you man, what happened eh?
I never said megabit is mb so what is your problem?
Comment