Chris H. wrote:
Interesting to note (to me anyway) is my SCSI reports fastest on the outside
whereas my (earlier reported) ATA reports faster in the center (middle).
You get better seek times on average in the center.
Maybe that affected your results?
--
Tuomo
... Nitpicking - not just a
Note that using different slices may change your results. All modern
disks are faster near the outside (start of the disk) then the inside
(I get more than 50% increase from inside to outside on one system).
I am thinking this will not be an issue, given that it is the performance
of the
On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 13:22 -0500, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 06:00:56PM -0600 I heard the voice of
Scott Long, and lo! it spake thus:
Modern disks (I don't know how to define a cutoff to this term,
unfortunately) definitely put more bits onto the outer rim of the
On Mon, Apr 10, 2006 at 10:02:34AM -0400 I heard the voice of
Christian Lopez de Castilla Wagner, and lo! it spake thus:
As you can see, the outside is more than twice as fast in this case.
Just a guess, since both are IBM disks: You're using a
Workstation/Server disk, which probably performs
On Sat, 2006-Apr-08 18:00:56 -0600, Scott Long wrote:
Modern disks (I don't know how to define a cutoff to this term,
unfortunately)
I got my first ZBR (zone-block recording) Seagate SCSI disk at work
about 20 years ago. I'm not sure when it became common.
other day. I'm still not clear on
On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 06:00:56PM -0600 I heard the voice of
Scott Long, and lo! it spake thus:
Modern disks (I don't know how to define a cutoff to this term,
unfortunately) definitely put more bits onto the outer rim of the
platter than the inner rim.
Pretty much any disk you'd currently
Quoting Matthew D. Fuller [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 06:00:56PM -0600 I heard the voice of
Scott Long, and lo! it spake thus:
Modern disks (I don't know how to define a cutoff to this term,
unfortunately) definitely put more bits onto the outer rim of the
platter than the
On Fri, 7 Apr 2006, Peter Jeremy wrote:
PJ I know that what I should do is install i386 on the client and test again,
but
PJ doing that will lose my only 64 bit environment so I am loathe to do so.
Any
PJ comments ?
PJ
PJ Backup your amd64 environment and install i386. You can re-install
PJ
On Sat, 2006-Apr-08 20:41:36 +0400, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
On Fri, 7 Apr 2006, Peter Jeremy wrote:
PJ Backup your amd64 environment and install i386. You can re-install
PJ the amd64 once the testing is finished. The best benchmark is always
PJ your own application.
Or, even better, use spare
Quoting Peter Jeremy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sat, 2006-Apr-08 20:41:36 +0400, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
On Fri, 7 Apr 2006, Peter Jeremy wrote:
PJ Backup your amd64 environment and install i386. You can re-install
PJ the amd64 once the testing is finished. The best benchmark is always
PJ your
Chris H. wrote:
Quoting Peter Jeremy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sat, 2006-Apr-08 20:41:36 +0400, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
On Fri, 7 Apr 2006, Peter Jeremy wrote:
PJ Backup your amd64 environment and install i386. You can re-install
PJ the amd64 once the testing is finished. The best benchmark
Skipping all of your technical questions I'll tell you my experience. The
only regret i have is one that makes me sometimes wish I'd not upgraded my
desktop 64 bit... the dri drivers for xorg lock up my box (ATI card). This
has been a thorn in my side for over 6 months now, but I just haven't had
Sex, 2006-04-07 às 00:18 -0400, Tim Middleton escreveu:
Skipping all of your technical questions I'll tell you my experience. The
only regret i have is one that makes me sometimes wish I'd not upgraded my
desktop 64 bit... the dri drivers for xorg lock up my box (ATI card). This
has been a
On Apr 6, 2006, at 1:30 AM, Nikolas Britton wrote:
$200 bucks got me a Athlon 64 3000+ Venice and a ASUS A8V Motherboard.
I'll be converting my Pentium 4 2.26GHz desktop system that has
FreeBSD 6.1-PRERELEASE i386 on it, gcc is currently set to build with
-march=pentium2 and -mtune=pentium4
If your running a desktop, I'd recommend sticking with 32-bit. For a
server doing a lot of I/O, go with 64-bit. The Athlon will run very
fast in both modes, but your software compatibility is better in i386
mode.
Interesting comment - I have a server at home with a pair of Opteron
On Apr 6, 2006, at 10:38 AM, Pete French wrote:
I was thinking of moving this to amd64, but was kind of put off by
results
from a test system I setup using an Athlon 64 3700+ to talk to this
machine. The opteron box is currently running 6.1-PRE/i386, and the
3700 is
Let me comment that
Let me comment that my 64-bit commentary about I/O is based on
experience with Opterons, which have excellent I/O bandwidth. The
Intel EM64T boxes do ok, too, but I have no experience with other 64-
bit CPUs. The opterons are just a notch above anything else that
I've used.
Ah, O.K.
On Thu, 2006-Apr-06 15:38:20 +0100, Pete French wrote:
I was thinking of moving this to amd64, but was kind of put off by results
from a test system I setup using an Athlon 64 3700+ to talk to this
machine. The opteron box is currently running 6.1-PRE/i386, and the 3700 is
runiing either Windows
Hello all,
I will be getting my very first 64-bit x86 system tomorrow and I don't
know anything about the platform at the software level. The last time
I touched an AMD based system was in the socket 7 days.
HELP!, what do I do with the extra 32-bits of CPU goodness? :-)
$200 bucks got me a
19 matches
Mail list logo
