davidsen@sungod.crd.ge.com (08/09/89)
I recently replaced an Adaptek 2372 RLL controller with a WD1006VSR2. Under DOS the read performance was about 600KB (Core test) for both, while under Xenix the Adaptek showed about 120kb while the WD gave 320kb. The Adaptek had a habbit of forgetting the disk type of the 2nd hard disk when powered down. Several people told me they had seen this. Summary: the WD does its track buffering in hardware and doesn't depend on the BIOS to do part of the work. It seems to have fewer quirks in operation. The WD is a *pain* when doing low level format, because it stops on each error and asks if you want to mark the error. This leaves you sitting there. It's surface test seems better than the Adaptek, because Xenix badtrk didn't find any new bad tracks after the WD checked. I've been running a week and no new bad tracks yet. Under Xenix the backups ran peak 5MB/min (limited by the tape) with WD, average 4.02MB/min including time to change tapes. The Adaptek runs about 1MB/min because it can't keep the tape streaming. Hope this is of use. The Adaptek is still a fine controller for someone (a) running DOS, and (b) running one HD. I will probably sell off the Adaptek soon and I don't feel that anyone will be cheated buying it, but I *will* warn the buyer. bill davidsen (davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM) {uunet | philabs}!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me