Hello everybody,
After watching the latest BlueSCSI video by ActionRetro I had to do some tinkering...
I used my Mac SE/30 with 8MB RAM and System 7.5.5 and HDT 1.8 to compare the speeds of the following devices:
IBM H3171-S2 - 160MB SCSI drive from 1993:
BlueSCSI 1.0-c with the latest firmware (v1.1-20220404):
RaSCSI 2.4a with the latest firmware (v22.02.01) using a Pi Zero 2 W:
The image file was initialized with patched Apple HD SC Setup 7.3.5 and shared between the BlueSCSI and the RaSCSI.
I was surprised to find out that both BlueSCSI and RaSCSI delivered lower transfer rates than the IBM HDD and that RaSCSI was the slowest of the bunch. Due to the significantly lower access time both SD solutions feel zippier than the HDD though.
Is there an issue with my setup or do these numbers seem right? I did expect a better performance from the RaSCSI to be honest. Thank you!
After watching the latest BlueSCSI video by ActionRetro I had to do some tinkering...
I used my Mac SE/30 with 8MB RAM and System 7.5.5 and HDT 1.8 to compare the speeds of the following devices:
IBM H3171-S2 - 160MB SCSI drive from 1993:
BlueSCSI 1.0-c with the latest firmware (v1.1-20220404):
RaSCSI 2.4a with the latest firmware (v22.02.01) using a Pi Zero 2 W:
The image file was initialized with patched Apple HD SC Setup 7.3.5 and shared between the BlueSCSI and the RaSCSI.
I was surprised to find out that both BlueSCSI and RaSCSI delivered lower transfer rates than the IBM HDD and that RaSCSI was the slowest of the bunch. Due to the significantly lower access time both SD solutions feel zippier than the HDD though.
Is there an issue with my setup or do these numbers seem right? I did expect a better performance from the RaSCSI to be honest. Thank you!
Last edited: