Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!cbnews!shurr From: shurr@cbnews.ATT.COM (Larry A. Shurr) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc Subject: Re: Disk Data Transfer Question Message-ID: <2441@cbnews.ATT.COM> Date: 2 Dec 88 20:10:43 GMT References: <1228@dutesta.UUCP> Reply-To: shurr@cbnews.ATT.COM (Larry A. Shurr) Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories (actually an APR consultant) Lines: 29 In article <1228@dutesta.UUCP> franky@dutesta.UUCP (Frank W. ten Wolde) writes: [Has AT&T "3600" (think you mean 6300) with ST251-1 and WD1002S-WX1.] [Use interleave of 5 and gets transfer rate of ~100KB/sec. True IBM PC'] [use interleave of 3 and get ~170KB/sec. The PC runs at 4.77MHz and the] [Olivetti (what he actually has and which is the same thing as an AT&T] [6300) runs at 8MHz.] >My questions are: > 1. Is there someone out there who has the same problem? > 2. Is there someone with an AT&T 3600 with a data rate > of 170K/s (and a corresponding interleave of 3)? > 3. Is there someone who can tell me where the problem > originates and perhaps how to solve it? Frank, You've been had. The Olivetti M24/AT&T 6300 has an 8086 CPU running at 8MHz, but I understand that the bus runs at 4MHz (half the system clock rate) and *NOT* 4.77MHz. Consequently, your raw data transfer rate is actually LESS than a real-but-slower IBM PC. Here at the Labs, 6300's seem to perform well with an interleave of 4 in configurations similar to yours, but interleave factor 3 is a dog. Thus, there a lot of "slow" 6300's around because their hard disks came preformatted with an interleave factor of 3 and their owners don't know enough to realize what is wrong. regards, Larry -- Signed: Larry A. Shurr (att!cbnews!shurr or osu-cis!apr!las) Clever signature, Wonderful wit, Outdo the others, Be a big hit! - Burma Shave (With apologies to the real thing. Above represents my views only.)