On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 10:41:19 -0800, Zotin Khuma wrote:

I make extensive use of an OEM version of Norton Ghost 2003 that came
bundled with a mobo, and I've always noticed a huge difference in
speeds when I make backups on AMD and Intel machines of comparable
configurations : AMD always finishes in a quarter of the time taken by
Intel.

AMD : Athlon XP 2000+ to 2600+ on Asus A7N266, A7N8X and Biostar M7NCG
mobos.
Intel : P4 1.9 to 2.8 GHz on Intel motherboards (fewer machines
tested)
All with 256MB DDR RAM, Seagate 7.2krpm HDD.

Given below are times taken. The figures are only approximate as I
have not kept accurate records and exact hardware configs varied.
However they are not one-off operations - I get these figures
repeatedly.

Basic Win98SE : AMD 1 minute, Intel 4 mins
Win98 + drivers + other software (1GB) : AMD 5 mins, Intel 20 mins
Win98 + WinXP + other software (3.4GB) : AMD 9 mins, Intel 35 mins

I surface-scanned the HDDs and installed the softwares myself. I
always use Ghost in DOS mode by booting from CD so there's no Windows
involved. HD space ample and defrag makes no major difference.

I can't believe that this is mainly due to the difference in CPU
types. I work mostly but not exclusively with AMD computers, and since
I'm less familiar with Intel systems, I'll appreciate suggestions as
to what I'm doing wrong when using the Intel machines.

It's got to be something in the disk subsystem, CPU speed shouldn't have
any significant effect when ghosting a drive. It sounds like DMA is
disabled on the Intel systems and enabled on AMD systems.