> * "m. allan noah" <kitno455 at gmail.com>: >>> It's close enough for me. Who knows how they measure these things. >>> My measurement was "time scanadf", basically. It was done actually >>> feeding the papers through the scanner before scanadf exited, so >>> it's not entirely unimaginable that there is a bit of overhead in >>> actually transferring and writing the scans to disk. >> I wonder how fast it will go if you enable jpeg compression? You >> might need updated scanadf (or the scanimage that comes with >> sane-backends cvs) > > About the same as uncompressed PNM. (Also tried 200 DPI now, with no > noticeable difference in speed from 300 DPI.) > > The computer I'm testing this on is a Core 2 E8500 3.16GHz, by the > way.
I understand that the 6240 is similar to the 6230 but faster and with SCSI interface. I guess it might make a difference when connecting it via SCSI instead of USB. How is your connected? Simon