I realized that I didn't mention in my last message that all of that stuff
pertains to Win2000.
Ben Moore
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ben Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 11:05 AM
Subject: Re: PCWorks: Windows 2000 experts?
> You are going to find out that, at least in my experience, the HPT366
> controller is terrible. I have a Abit Be6-2 that I never could get the
> Highpoint controller to work with IBM drives when I first built the system
> and recently did get it working with newer drivers but the perfomance is
> just terrible. The drive gives better performance from the regular ide
> controller built into the board than from the Highpoint. As far as I can
> see, Highpoint has abandoned development of drivers for this controller
> since the HPT370 came out.
>
> The best thing you can do is to find all the drivers and bios that have
been
> issued for your board, try different combinations and find the one that
> gives you the best performance but I don't think it will ever be anything
> that you will be satisfied with.
>
> You ought to go to usenet to alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.soyo and see if
> anyone has come up with a fix. I'm sure you are not the only one having
the
> problem.
>
> Ben Moore
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Clint Hamilton"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 9:36 AM
> Subject: PCWorks: Windows 2000 experts?
>
>
> > Hi all. Hoping there is someone on the list that knows
> > win2k. I am quite proficient with win98, but I am not
> > familiar with win2k AT ALL, so please keep that in mind. :)
> > A few days ago I installed it on a new hard drive and wanted
> > to test some things to be sure they are operating at peak
> > performance. The hard drive is about the fastest IDE drive
> > made, an IBM 20gb 60GXP series...ATA 100, 7200rpm, 2mb
> > buffer, and the highest areal density currently on the
> > market. (PIII 800e, 256mb CAS2 PC133)
> >
> > I ran the diagnostics and benchmarking program "SiSoft
> > Sandra" some of are familiar with it, but you don't need to
> > be to see the problem. I ran a benchmark of the hard drive,
> > and it was a LOT lower than the HD on win98. For reference
> > purposes, all you need to really know or see is that the
> > difference in the rating was big. On win98, the "drive
> > index" was over 15,000. On win2k, it was only 8300! The
> > access time is quite good, buffered read and write times as
> > you can see are very high, at over 1200Mb/sec, but it
> > suffers tremendously with sequential read and random read
> > performance. (These should be several times higher which
> > evidently is what is bringing the rating down). This was
> > with "windows disk cache on" in the program's options, it
> > was even lower with 'bypass windows disk cache' checked.
============= PCWorks Mailing List =================
Don't see your post? Check our posting guidelines &
make sure you've followed proper posting procedures,
http://pcworkers.com/rules.htm
Contact list owner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Unsubscribing and other changes: http://pcworkers.com
=====================================================
