Something a little strange, I was using a p2b-ds with 2 ide drives on the
same cable, western digitals. The jumpers are set to cable select.

I replaced my p2b with an a8v, plugged the cable into the new board and the
master seems to perform a lot better than the slave. They are both the same
drive, WD800JB.

I also have an ide cd player/recorder and keep it ont he secondary ide
channel. I am also using a 40-pin, 80-wire cable. I took out the one I
have and used the ASUS cable but have the same result.

Any idea why the master would perform better than the slave?

Thanks.

-g

I did some investigating of my own and connected one drive as the master
then connected the other drive as a master and ran the drive benchmark
tests. To my surprise, the one drive is faster than the other. They are
both the same model, a WD800JB and were bought within a year of each other.

Here are the benchmarks:

Drive 2 Master
smart polling speed: 0.0034 sec
random sector access: 14.766
sector access veloc: 1,549,230
burst transfer rate: 33,605,502
sustained transfer rate: 62,281,150

Drive 1 Slave
smart polling speed: 0.3416 sec
random sector access: 15.576
sector access veloc: 1,468,714
burst transfer rate: 31,636,546
sustained transfer rate: 41,154,500

-g

On Sun, 25 Dec 2005 12:29:14 GMT, "geoff" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> I did some investigating of my own and connected one drive as the master
> then connected the other drive as a master and ran the drive benchmark
> tests. To my surprise, the one drive is faster than the other. They are
> both the same model, a WD800JB and were bought within a year of each other.

Reverse them then test again.

> Reverse them then test again.

That is what I am saying, I had one drive as the master, no other drive
connected, then the other drive as the master. The results were the same as
the tests in the other post when both were connected. I do not understand
why one is faster than the other unless western digital made an improvement
to the drive within 9 months or so.

-g

"geoff" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:vTwrf.9557$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Reverse them then test again.
>
> That is what I am saying, I had one drive as the master, no other drive
> connected, then the other drive as the master. The results were the same
> as the tests in the other post when both were connected. I do not
> understand why one is faster than the other unless western digital made an
> improvement to the drive within 9 months or so.
>
> -g
>
>

Do both drives have the exact same firmware revision? Firmware usually does
get updated over the manufacturing life of the model.