pure curiosity? could you provide numbers for this? for example copying a big file?
personally i always thought win98 would handle media a little bit faster than nt, since only nt leaves some margin in order to avoid the whole system to lag during large operations?

here is an example, I took a random game disc , and attempted to copy the largest file on the CD onto the desktop ( the file was 600+ MB ) and took a screenshot the moment the remaining time appeared (and it took that long too). I can understand it things are a bit faster or slower but half the speed on identical hardware?

the DVD drive being used right now is a 52x speed Sony drive , but as stated it happened on other drives from other manufacturers

the estimation routine in windows is more than just buggy imho, it belongs into a straitjacket; did it really take twice the time? frankly with such a difference id rather think the driver is buggy/weirdly featured; any way you could see if this happens for standard ide/any additional controller running with a separate driver?

UDMA getting disabled is usually the first thing I'd look at, but evidently that's not the case here. Maybe you have a bad upperfilter or lowerfilter installed somehow? Those can also be problematic.

I also recall reading something about optimizing cache sizes, but I'm not sure if that applies to Windows 2000.
http://web.archive.org/web/20160324000008/htt … com/newtip6.htm

Try testing with CD Speed 99 to see what the transfer rate actually is. It'll work on both OSs.

here are the results I got, a bit odd.

and you have good harddisk performance on that controller? 😮 i dont know how reproducible those results are, but overall win2k does better, just gets choked down more often than on windows 9 which results in lower overall speed, even access time is 20% worse;

then the question would be what is slowing things down in Win2K? if one thinks of hardware this is an SMP machine with 1GB of RAM , meaning Win2K has an extra CPU and more RAM (its limited in my Win98 config) to play with.

I did actually try an IDE hard drive on this controller and it got around 60Mbps (its an ATA66 controller, as its using the i820 chipset), of course the SCSI drive in use is faster.

i was rather aiming at trying to check if cds get read faster on a second controller with windows 2k; quite frankly i think adaptec software in win2k sucks;

mrau wrote:

i was rather aiming at trying to check if cds get read faster on a second controller with windows 2k; quite frankly i think adaptec software in win2k sucks;

right now the CD drive is using the 2nd IDE channel , but I did try it on the primary channel and it gave me the same issue. This is the onboard IDE by the way, the adaptec card is for SCSI.

i just reread your 1st post - i got it totally wrong 🙁