aiharris Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 (edited) I have a choice of locations for my Retrospect engine. One is on a dual G4 PPC XServe, 1.3 GHz, but this machine has eSata drives attached for the backup files. The alternative is a 2.0 GHz Intel core 2 duo mac mini, with USB. Which will be faster?? Do I pick the slower processor with the faster drive interface, or the faster processor with the slower drive interface? This refers to Retrospect 8.1. Edited July 22, 2009 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lennart_T Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 There is another forum for Retrospect 8, this is for versions up to 6.1. (But I admit it might not be clear.) Anyway, unless you use software compression, the bottleneck is not CPU power, so I would go for PPC with the fast disks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aiharris Posted July 25, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 Thanks. First, I thought that I had posted in the Retrospect 8.0 forum. But, thanks again. Posts here are often viewed, but rarely answered. Anyway, I do use software compression. Does that change your answer? Adam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lennart_T Posted July 27, 2009 Report Share Posted July 27, 2009 Yes, that changes my answer. With software compression, go with the faster processor. And go with Firewire instead of USB. Firewire is actually faster than USB, even if we talk just FW400. The latest mini has FW800, which is even faster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.