Thanks Rich, Not sure I have answers to all your questions, however:
At 66, having multiple drives on the same cable or even controller can cause the connections capabilities to be less than the aggregate drive's max ( sustainable) throughput (You just gotta do the maths for the physical drive configuration) Although, with some of the newer drives configurations, I'm beginning to suspect each will need a dedicated '133' connection to itself - I'm looking to go S-ATA 2 with the 300 rating for my next system. I'd sooner spend ?50 extra on a motherboard with 6+ SATA-2 connections, and ?100 to get 2Gb fast memory than spend the ?150 on a 20% faster CPU - a year later I will probably be able to get a 50% faster CPU for just ?50, and meanwhile I've saved lots of processing time by avoiding having the CPU wait for disk IO 25% loss - as you agree, it's parallel, but one at a time, plus some negotiations. Timings I did a long while ago showed 2 '33' drives on a '33' motherboard, lost 30% of the throughput when 2 drives were being used on the same cable (partition replication from one drive to another, no verify etc., as opposed to copy from one drive to another with each on different cable, both copies being master to slave) Yep - '66' interface with a '33' rated device usually seemed to slow the transfers down to the lowest common denominator including PIO or DMA - and some current 'Retail' CD drives are still only rated at 33, not many though Never did any proper tests re the newer CD/DVD drives and '66' rated drives and systems but do remember that using a slow drive on the same cable as a fast one means that, for the same data volume, the slow drive has far more impact on the usage than the fast one. JimB ----- Original Message ----- From: "RichK" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2005 12:19 AM Subject: Re: How fast is HD internal compared to HD USB 2.0? -- ---------------------------------------- The WIN-HOME mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned LISTSERV(R) list management software. For more information, go to: http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
