> indeed the FreeDOS kernel is about 2* slower then necessary
>> *on rotating rust disks* ; the reason is known (1)
> Because I/O is split to avoid 64 kB DMA boundaries,
> into 2, at most 3 transfers, even when only floppy
> would need it, according to your footnote (1).
> If your diagnosis is
Hello Eric,
I would be very pleased to conduct tests that aren't just about
permanent storage IO. I'm also curious how does FreeDOS perform.
I have such a platform:
- Abit VP6
- 2x Pentium 3 @ 1.4GHz (Tualatin, SMP compatible, require Lin-Lin
sockets, usually running at 700MHz)
- 128MB SDRAM
Hallo Tom,
>> As FreeDOS has the reputation of having slow disk I/O,
> 'reputation' meaning that Jack told you so...
Jack is indeed one pronounced critic of our I/O speed.
> indeed the FreeDOS kernel is about 2* slower then necessary
> *on rotating rust disks* ; the reason is known (1)
Becau
Hallo Herr Eric Auer,
> As FreeDOS has the reputation of having slow disk I/O,
'reputation' meaning that Jack told you so...
but indeed the FreeDOS kernel is about 2* slower then necessary
*on rotating rust disks*; the reason is known (1), hasn't been fixed
for the last few years, and given th
Hi Deposite Pirate,
> I might have noticed that DR-DOS is a little faster
> when operating from a floppy disk.
You could try using lbacache with the flop option and
tickle for FreeDOS and/or DR-DOS, and compare with a
DR-DOS cache of your choice. Check whether the caches
correctly notice disk c
Hi Eric,
I have Pentium 133 Mhz with normal IDE drive a then bunch of laptops with 386,
486 a Pentium CPU's
They run different brands of DOS operating system. FreeDOS is of course
installed as well ;-) But problem to run same test on same hardware but with
different OS.
Petr
13. 7. 2020 5:04,
I have a Pentium 200 MMX system with a CF to IDE adapter and
a bunch of CF cards with different OSes including custom
installed (I don't use official installers and just install
the old way and edit config.sys and autoexec.bat to my taste)
FreeDOS 1.3rc3 and DR-DOS 8.1. I have used both to do diffe
Hi Jerome and Mercury,
> You got a preferred benchmark program?
I have some ideas, yes... The idea is to compare filesystem
performance of FreeDOS to other brands of DOS, so you would
need some method of dual-booting, for example metakern or
grub or lilo or similar. Typical tests would be to co
Hi Eric,
You got a preferred benchmark program?
Just today I located my 486 DX2/66 notebook & docking station in my attic. Not
sure either still works. But last time I powered it up, the notebook wouldn’t
hold a charge. However it still worked. That was 10+ years ago. But, I think
it’ll proba
That's something I could do... as long as nobody minds the delay incurred by my
packed schedule lol
Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Sunday, July 12, 2020 4:12 PM, Eric Auer e.a...@jpberlin.de wrote:
> Hi DOS users :-)
> As FreeDOS
Hi DOS users :-)
As FreeDOS has the reputation of having slow disk I/O,
I would like to get that quantified a bit... So if you
have not only FreeDOS but also other DOS brands on your
computers and can run the same tests on different DOS
versions on the same hardware, I would like to get in
touch
11 matches
Mail list logo
