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.

Pastimes : Dream Machine ( Build your own PC ) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: CatLady who wrote (4493)	12/29/1998 9:10:00 PM
From: Zeuspaul	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14778

If he can choose to boot from C or D via Bios settings, does it really matter which drive is set to be slave or which is master? I originally suggested leaving the system "as is" and was over ruled. System priorities and defaults will probably make a difference. Some operations will treat the Primary Master as the "C" drive even if it is set as "D" in the bios for booting purposes. For example if you try to install Win98 to the slave drive designated as the boot drive in the bios it will ignore you and install to the Primary Master. The best answer IMO is to go with the flow/defaults. Clarence's system is an NT system so NT is best on the Primary Master. I'm assuming that when he's running NT most read/writes will be to the NT drive and similarly when running W98 read/writes will be to that drive mostly. I think you are correct that if the read/writes are to the same drive there is no performance issue. Clarence's machine is using the Win98 drive as a utility drive. He does not intend on using Win98 as a stand alone operating system. The intent is to boot to the utility drive as a tool to keep the NT drive "working". The Win98/utility/KOT(keep on truck'n) drive will be used to flash bios(you need to boot DOS to flash bios..something NT can not do) and restore NT drive images in the event of an NT failure. Welcome to the thread... Zeuspaul BTW..nice handle

To: CatLady who wrote (4493)	12/30/1998 8:18:00 PM
From: Spots	Respond to of 14778

>>Does the master get priority over slave for I/O? Does the master perform any better than the slave? As to priority, IDE controllers are single-threaded, so there's no priority issue. Whichever I/O starts first does it first. As to performance, there are lots of opinions and I've never gotten a clear authoritative answer. From my less-than-exhaustive observations, the slave drive will be limited to the master's capabilities as to I/O modes, DMA transfers, and so on. Assuming the master has the capabilities of the slave, the slave suffers no performance penalty, even if it's a faster device. This was more important a couple of years ago than it is now, when IDE was changing rapidly. A statement I've heard often which I have verified myself is not true is that the master will be limited by the slave (e.g., a master hard disk and a slave CD-ROM). There MAY be cases where this is so, I don't claim to be an expert, but I run hard drives at maximum throughput for the drive with a slow CD-ROM as a slave on the same controller. Spots