CF versus IDE HDD results

All that power in a laptop? Never…

CF versus IDE HDD results

Postby Mk.558 » 01 Jul 2012, 19:14

Dumped the IDE hard drive results this morning. CF was done a couple of weeks ago.

Graphical:

f0adbe90.jpg


Text version:

c211d5b5.png


CF worth it? Oh heck yeah. No sounds whatsoever. Feels weird now to have a spinning disk in there. Also, if something goes wrong, it's a dual slot adaptor, not like I can't put another card in there to get another bootable card for another application. Or if it runs into trouble, pull the card and put a new one in, but the Industrial variants have a MTBF of 1 million hours, so I figure I have a long ways to go. :)

Mac details: Oh yeah and I dumped MacBench 4.0 onto the hard drive, I wasn't about to run it off the network or CD.

d8cc3446.jpg
6b42ace3.jpg
f4eea9de.jpg


Originals: [1] [2] [3]
Last edited by Bunsen on 13 Jul 2012, 05:48, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: uploaded images locally, links to originals
SE/30 Cap Replacement http://tinyurl.com/7r7jjor
Classic Mac Networking http://applefool.com/se30/ < Working on version 3.0!
"Linux assumes you know exactly what you are doing." -oboedad55, ubuntuforums.org
User avatar
Mk.558
 
Joined: 20 Nov 2010, 17:38

Re: CF versus IDE HDD results

Postby Mk.558 » 04 Jul 2012, 18:49

Anybody else doing this sort of thing?

Seems quite quiet now...
SE/30 Cap Replacement http://tinyurl.com/7r7jjor
Classic Mac Networking http://applefool.com/se30/ < Working on version 3.0!
"Linux assumes you know exactly what you are doing." -oboedad55, ubuntuforums.org
User avatar
Mk.558
 
Joined: 20 Nov 2010, 17:38

Re: CF versus IDE HDD results

Postby Charlieman » 04 Jul 2012, 19:34

The three tables at the top are interesting. For tiddly files (smaller than 128KB), the performance benefits on read access are modest, but these are the file sizes that are most common for Mac OS 7.6 Macs. Apart from the System file and Finder, how much in the System folder is bigger than 128KB? Does Mac OS 7.6 make a difference? -- block sizes would be smaller with HFS+. The 1MB file size performance improvements are pretty conclusive, however. If your data files are sound, video or graphics, CF will make your Mac snappier.

Without intending to sneer at a Duo 2300 (which I'd love to use), it isn't the model that will most benefit from CF in performance terms. I am tempted to put one into my PB 3400 (or rather, I'm happy to know that it is a realistic proposition when my hard disk dies).
Charlieman
 
Joined: 03 May 2007, 11:19
Location: Leicester, UK

Re: CF versus IDE HDD results

Postby beachycove » 04 Jul 2012, 20:23

My 2400c/180 was noticeably faster with a CF drive installed internally, and indeed, the results were more dramatic. It was not so good in the PCMCIA slot, however.
User avatar
beachycove
 
Joined: 02 May 2007, 20:33
Location: Ontario

Re: CF versus IDE HDD results

Postby Trash80toHP_Mini » 04 Jul 2012, 21:16

Interesting about the differences in performance there. I wonder if it's the PCMCIA controller that's the bottleneck?
User avatar
Trash80toHP_Mini
NIGHT STALKER
 
Joined: 04 Apr 2009, 02:23
Location: Bermuda Triangle, NC, USA

Re: CF versus IDE HDD results

Postby Mk.558 » 03 Sep 2012, 02:46

I nearly forgot about this, but...

The Duo's IDE connector has a blank pin, it is visible on the photo below. If you are upgrading to a CF solution (highly recommended) then you'll have to break off the pin. In this adaptor, I followed the pin and it was just a ground pin. As they say, "Mind your pin 1!" and it is certainly true. Make quadruply sure you are looking at it right.

Image
SE/30 Cap Replacement http://tinyurl.com/7r7jjor
Classic Mac Networking http://applefool.com/se30/ < Working on version 3.0!
"Linux assumes you know exactly what you are doing." -oboedad55, ubuntuforums.org
User avatar
Mk.558
 
Joined: 20 Nov 2010, 17:38


Return to PPC PowerBook & iBook

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest