#bad PP 040 for A3k?
16 messages in this thread
Not sure what to say. MY PPI 040 has been a pretty solid performer on my
3000 for years. It's been the source of a few glitches. It's very
intolerant of most enforcer hits. The 4x speed however does make it more
than worth the tradeoffs.
I had a lot of problems with the checksum error sort of thing when I
upgraded to 3.1. Everything is pretty stable now and the 040 is working
better than ever.
-Richard
Do you know wha you did to get rid of the checksum errors after your WB
upgrade?
Paul (aka Mr. Zombie)
I wish there were an easy answer on that one. 3.1 gets along with the
3000's scsi bus in some ways that are different than 2.x. I always suspect
that the 040 may have something to do with weirdnesses in my system but
many of the problems I developed after adding 3.1 roms just weren't
happening before.
The system wanted to boot faster than my hard drive did presenting the
insert workbench3.1 disk message. A warm reboot would start everything
fine. I had to set the timeout to 2 secs in the battmem bits and the
machine would take an aeon to start. I ended up getting a much faster
drive and eliminated the problem. I hear getting an updated scsi chip
helps smooth things out. I had a couple of programs that started writing
to the hard drive as they crashed. upon restart, I would get all kinds of
checksum errors reported and nonvalidated device requesters. Spent along
time recovering the drive with DiskSalv only to find it happening again
after reformatting. I discovered that letting the drive spin a long time
usually straightened out.
ADPro is a program I use frequently and it was giving me all kinds of
problems. Just quiting the program would start writing to the drive and
crashing the machine. I was running it from the CLI with some workbench
launching program so I started running it from the icon and everything was
OK. Must have been some of ADPro's preferrences were set up in a way
unacceptable to 3.1.
-Richard
Gulp. And here I was thinking about getting an 040 AND 3.1! I will be getting
a faster drive, though, since I'll be doing some sound editing on my machine,
and I want to put everthing on that drive, to get a speedup everywhere, and
maybe even ditch my current drive.
Paul (aka Mr. Zombie)
A faster drive makes a big difference and expands what you can do. I put
in a Micropolis 1.7 gig av drive in my 3000 and I can now play large
animations from the drive at a reasonable speed.
-Richard
I am using a Quantum Lightening 730 on my A1200 with the SCSI+ from the
Expension Systems. Unfortunatly I am only getting 830KB on reads and wrrites.
My 1st question is how fast is your Micropolis. My second question is about 2.5
inch IDE's for the 1200 (If you know anything about them) My friend owns a
Maxtor 2.5 270 meg HD (A1200) he is getting about 2 Megs on reads/write
(SysInfo) How is this possible if the IDE controller on the 1200 is very slow?
(Expension System's tech told me that 1 meg is the max that the 1200 controller
can put through)
IF you get fastram, your drive speed increases dramatically.his drive oribably
uses a reasonable amount of hard disk cache and fast memory buffers.I can't
imagine what a fast harddrive is like because my 1200's 60 mb seagate hd is
reporting 337 kb per second using sysinfo 3.23 ,which is about as fast as my
floppy.
I do have fast ram and an 030 processor. Considering your HD I should not
probably even complain about mine. Thanks for your reply.
>> I can't imagine what a fast harddrive is like because my 1200's 60 mb
>> seagate hd is reporting 337 kb per second using sysinfo 3.23 ,which is
>> about as fast as my floppy.
Be thankful. My 1200's HD gets 195K/sec. >:(
– Jim, on AP (on my 4000 with a faster HD)!
why on earth are they so slow?
one thing i do know that the dataflyer scsi + is about 1 mb per second,and if i
added fast ram buffers to my hd ,it will be about 1mb per second also,which i
can't do yet because i have no fast ram or accelerator yet.
Hmm. I don't have experience with 1200 but 195k/sec is extremely slowww! I
had a faster transfer rate with my A2090 controller and an old 20M Seagate MFM.
I think you should backup all the data on your HD and then experiment with
different MaxTransfer values to see if it will improve your data transfer rate.
You should also ensure that the parameters used to prep and format the drive
(cylinders, heads, sectors per track, etc.) are correct, although if it's SCSI
that shouldn't be so critical as long as the drive's capacity isn't exceeded.
//daniel on
\X/ AutoPilot 1.75
I think that tech is wrong. I bought a used 1200 with a 125 meg 2.5 " IDE
drive in it. Never measured the speed but it seems plenty fast to me. The
Micropolis in my 3000 does around 3 megs a second according to SysInfo. I
remember seeing something about an adjustment to the MaxTransfer setting
in HDToolbox could help the speed of 1200's hard drive. Not sure about
your SCSI controller and drive, it seems it should faster than that. This
setting may have some affect on your drive also.
-Richard
Ok, thanks for the advice about the max transfer. I will play around with that.
I too, am using a SCSI+.
I'm using an A1200 with a 127-meg, 2.5-inch, Seagate ST9145a drive.
Without the SCSI+, I get a speed 199Kps using SYSINFO on the SPEED test, but if
use SYSINFO's read SCSI option on a partition before reading the SPEED, I get
899Kps instead. Using the SCSI+, SYSINFO gives a reading of 790Kps.
A major difference appears in the amount of CPU available for other tasks when
accessing the hard drive. Without the SCSI+, I have 80% of the CPU free, but
access the HD with the SCSI+ active the CPU changes to 0% free.
Other have reported that their A1200's (with othe model HD's) have a 800Kps
rate.
Apparently, some IDE drives are more standard than others.
Since the A1200 IDE interface & the SCSI+ are CPU driven, a faster CPU could
affect the speed, and free up more CPU time for other tasks.
– Ron. (People who say cats always land on their feet…
just don't know how to throw them right.)
"I too, am using a SCSI+.
Ron, thanks for your reply. I used DiskSpeed 4.2 and I got similar results, )%
CPU free. I have an 030 in my 1200 with 4 megs fast ram by the way.