Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!fs7.ece.cmu.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!gatech!usenet.ufl.edu!darwin.sura.net!newsserver.jvnc.net!news.cac.psu.edu!psuvm!dxb132
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 00:42:24 EDT
From: <DXB132@psuvm.psu.edu>
Message-ID: <93106.004224DXB132@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: IDE vs SCSI
Distribution: world
References: <1qlbrlINN7rk@dns1.NMSU.Edu>
Lines: 18

In article <1qlbrlINN7rk@dns1.NMSU.Edu>, bgrubb@dante.nmsu.edu (GRUBB) says:

>In PC Magazine April 27, 1993:29 "Although SCSI is twice as fasst as ESDI,
>20% faster than IDE, and support up to 7 devices its acceptance ...has
>long been stalled by incompatability problems and installation headaches."

I love it when magazine writers make stupid statements like that re:
performance. Where do they get those numbers? I'll list the actual
performance ranges, which should convince anyone that such a
statement is absurd:

SCSI-I ranges from 0-5MB/s.
SCSI-II ranges from 0-40MB/s.
IDE ranges from 0-8.3MB/s.
ESDI is always 1.25MB/s (although there are some non-standard versions)



