Re: USB speed on old mobo?

SleeperMan <SleeperMan@xxxxxxxxxx>, the exhausted-tramp and hedonistic
hermaphrodite who likes fiendish one-stick drum improvisation with emus,
and whose partner is a woman of loose morals with a damp mound, wrote in
<_v65g.2310$oj5.822565@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
In news:w655g.6303$Nk3.3238@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
relic <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> typed:
SleeperMan wrote:
In
dowdy-drifter@thou-coward-thou-grease-covered-pribbling-old-pantaloon">news:dowdy-drifter@thou-coward-thou-grease-covered-pribbling-old-pantaloon,
Banned Apache
<alt.books.bemused.blonde.lady-for-hire@delicate-***'s-crib.co.jp>
typed:
SleeperMan <SleeperMan@xxxxxxxxxx>, the farting-ne'er-do-well and
queasy tante who likes unspeakable ear sex with grizzly bears, and
whose
partner is a hedge whore with a soaking bone polisher, wrote in
<xU%4g.2259$oj5.820388@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
In news:z84ftg$wuo$o@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
Kadaitcha Man <***-you.ya.***@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> typed:
SleeperMan <SleeperMan@xxxxxxxxxx>, the horizontally enhanced
capper, proscribed:

In news:wf02b8$n3i$x@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
Kadaitcha Man <***-you.ya.***@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
typed:
SleeperMan <SleeperMan@xxxxxxxxxx>, the overdelicate herald,
tehee'd:

In
cadaverous-drifter@thou-huge-bombard-of-sack-thou-infectious-currish-so-dissolute-a-crew">news:cadaverous-drifter@thou-huge-bombard-of-sack-thou-infectious-currish-so-dissolute-a-crew,
Banned Apache <rec.arts.ratty.yayas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
typed:
SleeperMan <SleeperMan@xxxxxxxxxx>, the boring-bag-man and
pudgy pile-driver who likes ravenous nad chewing with moray
eels, and whose partner is a piece-of-ass with a swollen
cradle of filth, wrote in
<s1I4g.2211$oj5.813249@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
I just made some tests...
i have (old) Soyo Dragon plus K7V board (fsb133) and
on-board USB 1.1 and additional USB 2.0 IDE board. Now,
when i put in my new Transcend JF150 1G USB2.0 key into PC
- could it be download
from key so much faster than upload to key? For example,
when having key in USB 2.0 board, FROM key is about 10000
kb/sec, while TO key speed is only about 170 kb/sec,
HOWEVER, when i put key into mobo USB1.1 slot, speed FROM
key is veeery slow (like 80 kb/sec) , while speed TO key is
actually faster than one in USB 2.0 slot - some 340
kb/sec... how can these differences be?? i tried some
different drivers - the one which installs automatically
from XP (standard enchanced PCI to USB host controller) is
the slowest one, while other two (NEC USB 2.0 controller
and USB 2.0 Enchanced host controller) are faster, but only up
to what i wrote above.
speed FROM key is same no matter which driver i use, only
speed TO key differs.
maybe i wrote too complicated---? but i'd like some
explanations, or suggestions. Luckily i mostly
download( from my Canon S2 digital camera), but now i'll
also upload to my new key and some speed would be nice...

Did you replace that shitty old USB2 (fast) card with a new
(full speed) card as suggested?

I wouldn't be surprised if crappy hardware from slope cunts
in hong kong causes problems like you describe.

i wonder what's maximum bandwidth of those old mobo's...if
they can transfer that high speed data at all...if they can,
then shitty usb card would be a solution, since it was cheap.
So, you suggest it's one of those "USB 2.0 hi-speed
compatible" chinacrap ?

It's either that or an ID 10 T error.

uff...now you got me....i must look up for that meaning :-)

Remove the spaces :)


yep...done that...it's not an error i've got :-)))
and i still get too low speed when uploading to my new usb :-((

I have replaced a few motherboards recently, I've been using
ASROCK. They are cheap and pretty good quality from what I've seen.
Dump that AMD shyte and get a Pentium 4 and an ASROCK P4VM800
motherboard. They have 6 USB2 ports plus provision for an extra 2
on the front, they also have built-in everything else you may want.
They cost ***-all too.

hm... first of all, at time of my purchase amd was far better that
intel and far cheaper. These days amd is still far cheaper and still
at least equal than intel. AMD was first who made 64 bit CPU...intel
was light years behind it.
I'll have to hear a lot of definite pluses for intel to decide to
pay twice for a cpu. mobo's with nforce chipset are very good, i
hear...

The main reason to use the Intel P4 is to get a mobo with an Intel
Chipset. SiS, VIA, nForce, etc. are often the source of all problems.

aha...that's a new one for me. And i don't mean to say it ain't true.
I do wanted some serious reasons for getting Intel. This is one of
them and worthed to explore and think about it. Thanks for that one.
i do have VIA on current board...
it's just...if i decide to change the board, then it's whole new
pc...i'd need a pair of sata drives (i run mirrored raid), then i
guess pci express vga card ( and i just bought new AGP GF6600), a new
set of RAM module, possibly new more powerful PSU...everything has
changed so nothing old is good anymore...damned...

I recently swapped out a dead motherboard for someone's AMD system too. I
also used an ASROCK mobo.
If you already have a decent graphics card and don't want to update
everything else for the sake of it then stick with your AMD processor. Why
are we discussing motherboards anyway?



--
Lunch was nice;
Underdone hobo's nose hairs and ringtail monkey rot compote accompanied
by enervated skin on top of wracked up armadillo blister, served in a
congealing pannikin chock full of medium cooked bamboo, dried cooked
shrimp and lung, tea, a side of guinea pig eyeballs and a gallon of
limpid eyeball fluid.


.

Quantcast