You could try it. See if it really helps or slows the CPU too much. My guess is that you may not see a huge enough difference in disk speed. Im sure technically there would be, but not very noticeable.

With Fast enabled:

READ
Timing cached reads: 348.98 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 95.62 MB/sec

WRITE
83886080 bytes (84 MB) copied, 0,725587 s, 116 MB/s

Fast disabled:

READ
/dev/sda:
Timing cached reads: = 371.77 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: = 96.45 MB/sec

WRITE
83886080 bytes (84 MB) copied, 0,68932 s, 122 MB/s

Well, it looks like nothing really change... and results are quiet variable with high and low in both cases...

Yeah thats what i would have guessed. Usually why features like things never lasted i suppose.

Yeah. I see in some review it was some kind of 8X interconnection between the north and southbridge but maybe I alread reached the top with the SSD to see any improvements.

Different generations of V-Link used 4x, 8x, and 16x (Ultra V-Link) pumping. I doubt this is what's being changed. It's not like AGP where you have to worry about card compatibility. Both the NB and SB are permanently installed. I would guess that it's some sort of burst transfer mode and therefore more work flow dependent.

Edit: Fixed V-Link clock info.

I've seen V-Link 8x boards that default to 4x. I'm not sure I've ever seen 8x as the default... 4x is the original spec for 266 MB/s.

There might be a difference if you tested with 2 PATA channels at saturation. Throw a PCI IDE card in for even more bandwidth consumption.

Right you are wrt the original V-Link spec. I knew they had boosted the transfer rate a couple of times for the different generations of core logic chipsets. Originally, V-Link ran at 4x for 266 MB/s, then it was upgraded to 8x for 533 MB/s, and finally to Ultra V-Link for 1066 MB/s.