Prev: Pienel�inhoitajat lakkoilee
Next: Blutooth-WiFi interference: how serious is the performance loss?
From: Nicola Taibi on 18 Jun 2008 02:22
Tom Forsmo wrote:
> Hi
>
> In an article about the performance of sata raid controllers (
> StorageReview:
> http://www.storagereview.com/articles/200406/20040625TCQ_1.html?page=0%2C5
> ) using NCQ or TCQ. it stated that TCQ is much faster than NCQ:
>
> "SATA TCQ and SATA RAID have the potential to deliver benefits to the
> server market just as great as those of SCSI TCQ and SCSI RAID."
>
> So by using a SATA-1 TCQ RAID controller and WD Raptor disks one can
> get close to SCSI performance. (Sata 2 does not actually give the same
> performance according other tests I have read.)
>
> The article was written in 2004, and in four years much may have
> happened with NCQ. So the question is, does anybody know if much has
> happened with NCQ? or can I still trust the articles conclusions in
> terms of its performance?
>
> regards
>
> tom
Maybe it can help:
http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/315/1

With my best regards,

--
Nicola Taibi
Web home page: http://whisky1767.altervista.org
Photo home page: http://community.webshots.com/user/ntaibi
Nikon photo album: http://www.nikonista.it/ntaibi
e-mail: whisky1767(a)altervista.org

 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Pienel�inhoitajat lakkoilee
Next: Blutooth-WiFi interference: how serious is the performance loss?