[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Request for CF Performance Comparisons
- Subject: Request for CF Performance Comparisons
- From: pitz <pitz.wong@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2008 17:14:45 -0700 (PDT)
- Complaints-to: groups-abuse@google.com
- Injection-info: 34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com; posting-host=208.67.132.5; posting-account=Cmg1iAoAAADL_oeFOWHEgLV_pxVfLvbw
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
- Organization: http://groups.google.com
- User-agent: G2/1.0
- Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.sys.apple2:11050
I'm sold at using a CF card as my primary "hard disk". No moving
parts, and some (though certainly not all) CF cards have almost the
same MTBF rating as hard disks. I'm currently using a CFFA setup for
my IIgs.
What I want to find is how it compares, in terms of performance, with
other CF-based setups, assuming that the CF interface is not the
bottleneck (i.e., using a very fast CF).
I'm curious if using a Focus controller and an IDE-CF adapter is
better than a CFFA or MicroDrive setup. Or even a complex setup such
as a RAMFAST (or HS-SCSI) + SCSI-IDE adapter + IDE-CF adapter. There
are some SCSI-CF adapters out there, but not very common.
Can anyone who has more than one of the above setups provide some
performance characteristics of each?
/Peter