Konstantin Svist wrote:
For general performance, cached performance is pretty irrelevant,
you're still constrained to the bus speed at best, and the general
ability of the hardware (ATA motherboard electronics included) in
general.
I don't have the foggiest idea of what an HP ze4400 is; depending on
its age your speed of 28.55MB is pretty good.
I agree that cached performance doesn't matter all that much, normally.
However, it's a pretty large drop in performance - and I'm trying to
figure out why it happened. I wouldn't be worried about it if it were
off 5-10% - but it's just about HALF of the old value.
Also (and I'm not sure about this...) this might indicate some problem
with latency (which *would* be pretty important, especially if it's this
much).
Latency a problem on a laptop?
One of the tradeoffs one accepts in choosing a laptop is that it's
performance is going to be less than on less portable systems.
For starters, disks mostly spin at 5400 rpm instead of the usual 7200 on
desktops and 10,000-15,000 on other systems.
Latency might be important in systems doing lots of short reads; then
seek time matters too. When loading multimegabyte programs and data
files into RAM so they can be paged out, forget it.
--
Cheers
John
-- spambait
1aaaaaaa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Z1aaaaaaa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-- Advice
http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375
You cannot reply off-list:-)
