Back to home page

DOS ain't dead

Forum index page

Log in | Register

Search:  
Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view

Cache vs. no cache test with UDMA. Your links to IBIBLIO (Announce)

posted by lucho, 30.11.2007, 18:09
(edited by lucho on 30.11.2007, 18:28)

> Do you mean Ultimate DOS kernel file copy speed test?
No - as far as I remember, it was a special test to show the influence of the cache. I tink it was on Udo's forum where the same cache / no-cache arguments were going...

Thanks for showing how to add a link to an existing post here ("msg=xxx").

> Time to lock another thread, eh? :-|
It seems so. You could lock it at 23:59 GMT today...

It is also interesting that, if A. Grech and his friends here believe that XDMA32 is so "great", why do you have a new link to Jack's drivers on FreeDOS IBIBLIO? And if only Grech's "slight difference" exists between using XDMA32 / LBACACHE and using UIDE, why does IBIBLIO have a mirror of XMGR/UIDE at all? LBACACHE hasn't changed for years, while Jack took Tom Ehlert's suggestion in 2003 of using the HMA as a way to save space, without needing anything incompatible like JLMs. Do people really like losing all that upper-memory for LBACACHE, when UIDE needs only 1.75K for up to a 200 MB cache, 3.5K for 250 MB and can reach up to 1 GB? Try getting to any of those sizes with LBACACHE!

You still show a link to Jack's drivers on IBIBLIO because you know what works, like Jim Hall who also knows what works. That's why J. Hall refuses to remove Jack's drivers from IBIBLIO, although he knows that Jack doesn't want his drivers associated with FreeDOS, same as Jack now doesn't want the drivers associated with BTTR. Far too many bad guys on the forums of both websites! :-(

Thread locked
 

Complete thread:

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view
22632 Postings in 2109 Threads, 402 registered users, 445 users online (0 registered, 445 guests)
DOS ain't dead | Admin contact
RSS Feed
powered by my little forum