10 Mar
2001
10 Mar
'01
2:32 p.m.
From: Chad Fernandez <fernande(a)internet1.net>
That's true, but you aren't using the full
capacity of the slot. I
Maybe, likely it's not a fast machine anyway.
suppose if you already have an ISA card, and don't
really want to spend
anymore it's fine. I have a setup like that. I
have a VLB slot with a
The other side is even if you want to spend there are few NOS boards
out there and fewer have much performance.
ISA 1542B installed. I haven't actually gotten the
computer up yet....
still have some IRQ/DMA conflicts, I think.
Likely. Then again I set those things up in my sleep.
SCSI is backwards compatible as long as you keep Single
Ended and
Differential separate.
Thanks for the info... I only work with them for a lving. ;)
I would think any high end 486 class machine
would benefit from wide scsi. Remember SCSI doesn't rely on the CPU
like IDE does.
No. No. I retired an old P133 server that had a Wide SCSI card in it..
With the 33mhz FSB there was little hope of using all the performance
of the SCSI-W nor the really fast disk 7200rpm disk hooked to it. With
VLB or EISA your likely talking a 486DX4/133 maximum and they
are even slower. I know I have a 5x86/133 with VESA and the best
I see on that one is maybe 30mb/sec and that the burst rate not
an average.
I actually have a pair of 8-bit SCSI cards, a Seagate,
and an NCR. I
have used the Seagate, unfortunately it didn't see more than 2xx of the
300megs of my HD, after I repartitioned the HD on that controller. I
That and the best data rate will be 8-10mb/sec. ISA isn't fast.
Win95 if you have the OEM disk has drivers for some pretty old and
oddball stuff.
Maybe the point I'm making is just getting them going is often all that
can be asked. Trying to go for maximum smpoke is often not worth
it as recent hardware is cheap and far faster.
Allison
10 Mar
10 Mar
3:59 p.m.
ajp166 wrote:
I did a MB swap but only went over the jumpers on the MB, not the
jumpers on the cards. I'll get to it, as soon as I get around to
it..... really the main thing is getting the 1540 to work with the
onboard 1520.
You work with Differential (not LVD) every day? What do you do?
How did you get 30mb/sec out of a 20mb/sec capable hardware setup?
Narrow is 5, 8, or 10, ultra narrow is 20, wide is 20, ultra wide is 40
and U2W is 80, and U3W (U160) is 160. What VLB card is wide? I don't
think Adaptec has one, do they? I would like to get a VLB wide scsi
card for the computer mentioned above.
What do you use for drive benchmark testing? I use Snooper, but I never
get anywhere near the speeds that are advertised. I figure that Snooper
must use some sort of average, and I only compare Snooper results with
other Snooper results. For instance my UW drive on this computer checks
in at 5,xxx Kb/sec, but should be able to hit 40megs/sec, actually 80 if
I had an LVD cable. Its on a 2940U2W.
I need to rephrase that, the cards are 8-bit ISA, not 8-bit SCSI.
ISA 1542B
installed. I haven't actually gotten the computer up yet....
still have some IRQ/DMA conflicts, I think.
Likely. Then again I set those things up in my sleep. SCSI is
backwards compatible as long as you keep Single Ended and
Differential separate.
Thanks for the info... I only work with them for a lving. ;) I would think
any high end 486 class machine
would benefit from wide scsi. Remember SCSI doesn't rely on the CPU
like IDE does.
No. No. I retired an old P133 server that had a Wide SCSI card in it..
With the 33mhz FSB there was little hope of using all the performance
of the SCSI-W nor the really fast disk 7200rpm disk hooked to it. With
VLB or EISA your likely talking a 486DX4/133 maximum and they
are even slower. I know I have a 5x86/133 with VESA and the best
I see on that one is maybe 30mb/sec and that the burst rate not
an average. I actually have a pair of 8-bit SCSI cards, a
Seagate, and an NCR. I
have used the Seagate, unfortunately it didn't see more than 2xx of the
300megs of my HD, after I repartitioned the HD on that controller. I
That and the best data rate will be 8-10mb/sec. ISA isn't fast.
Win95 if you have the OEM disk has drivers for some pretty old and
oddball stuff. Maybe the point I'm making is just getting them
going is often all that
can be asked. Trying to go for maximum smpoke is often not worth
it as recent hardware is cheap and far faster.
I am not trying to be rude, or make enemies, but why are you on a
classic computer list? Sure I want my old computers to run, but I want
it to be a fast as I can get it, while maintaining reliably.
Chad Fernandez
Michigan, USA
11 Mar
11 Mar
3:02 a.m.
I need to rephrase that, the cards are 8-bit ISA, not
8-bit SCSI.
I just dug out my 8-bit ISA SCSI card and it turns out that
it's a Future Domain TMC-850MNEC, not a Trantor board as I thought I
had. Man, it's been a long time since I used this one. Nice small
form factor card that would fit in pretty much anything since it
doesn't extend past the end of the 8-bit slot. I think this one may
have been packed with one of NEC's CD-ROMs.
Jeff
--
Collector of Classic Microcomputers and Video Game Systems:
Home of the TRS-80 Model 2000 FAQ File
http://www.geocities.com/siliconvalley/lakes/6757
6:42 a.m.
I'll put my two cents into the discussion. A lot of the discussion depends
upon the busses in question.
Either an 8 or 16 bit ISA SCSI-1 or 2 card will saturate an ISA bus even at
5 MHz SCSI rate unless the ISA bus is overclocked. Of course the data rate
at which the 16 bit card saturates the bus will be double the tranfer rate
of the 8 bit card. In this case, if you're looking for max transfer rate you
should probably choose polled. If you want best system performance (and you're
running an OS that will take advantage of it) interrupt driven I/O is your
best bet, but your max transfer rate will likely be lower than PIO. A bus
master should be able to squeak out a bit more performance, to where you might
get closer to the max ISA rates.
The midrange busses (EISA, MCA) should be able to handle Fast Wide SCSI (20
MB/s), but they'll be near saturation there. The high end busses (VLB,PCI,
SBUS,etc) should be able to handle any SCSI you want to throw at them. For
our high end machines we tend to spread controllers on multiple PCI busses,
but that's not exactly classic-cmp stuff.
The classic-cmp question I have is at what point is a machine too slow for
SCSI, and how do things degrade as a machine gets slower. My Apple IIgs
doesn't seem to have any problem, but I doubt it can really handle transfers
at even 1/10 the SCSI-1 rate. But I assume there is a point at which things
break if bytes don't move fast enough. Anyone know what that point is? I've
been thinking about sticking an 8 bit SCSI card in my old Epson PC which,
because of brain damaged bus design can only pull 150 kB/s off of its drives.
Think it will work?
Eric
7:05 a.m.
The classic-cmp question I have is at what point is a
machine too slow for
SCSI, and how do things degrade as a machine gets slower. My Apple IIgs
doesn't seem to have any problem, but I doubt it can really handle transfers
at even 1/10 the SCSI-1 rate. But I assume there is a point at which things
break if bytes don't move fast enough. Anyone know what that point is? I've
been thinking about sticking an 8 bit SCSI card in my old Epson PC which,
because of brain damaged bus design can only pull 150 kB/s off of its drives.
Think it will work?
Eric,
Would you happen to have the utilities diskette for the Apple
High-Speed SCSI board for the IIGS?
Jeff
--
Collector of Classic Microcomputers and Video Game Systems:
Home of the TRS-80 Model 2000 FAQ File
http://www.geocities.com/siliconvalley/lakes/6757
12 Mar
12 Mar
2:50 a.m.
Would you happen to have the utilities diskette for
the Apple
High-Speed SCSI board for the IIGS?
Sorry, I've got a non-apple SCSI board. Is this it? Or is this something
different?
ftp://ftp.apple.com/Apple_Support_Area/Apple_Software_Updates/English-North…
Eric
8687
days inactive
8689
days old
5 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
ajp166＠bellatlantic.net -
fernande＠internet1.net -
jhellige＠earthlink.net -
korpela＠ellie.ssl.berkeley.edu