Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : TA-Quotes Plus -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bob Jagow who wrote (5887)	8/7/1998 4:56:00 AM
From: Clark Wang	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11149

Here is my performance test result of Diskbuff on two different drives. I try the 'newhighs' scan that comes with QP2. - Both qp2data and diskbuff on the same IDE drive: 202 seconds. - Qp2data and diskbuff on the different IDE drives/buses: 170 seconds. - Qp2data on IDE and diskbuff on SCSI: 155 seconds. My system is NT 4 with 128 Mbytes RAM. I think I'll keep qp2data and diskbuff on the same drive to make the backup a little bit easier. Clark

To: Bob Jagow who wrote (5887)	8/7/1998 7:55:00 AM
From: Monty Lenard	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 11149

Bob, It wasn't the SCSI's that I found expensive but the hook up I was trying for. Maybe I looked wrong. :-) The arrangement like I have with the IDE was about $750 vs $250. I had to have 3 SCSI adapters plus the carriages (keepers or whatever they are called that fits permanently in each machine). And yes the scans did slow down on the SCSI machine when I moved to the IDE/SCSCI arrangement. Monty PS Looks as if I should have called you first.:-))