I assumed that running with extensions off would equalize the comparisons. I
didn't consider that some extensions would enable better performance
(enabling backside cache maybe?).

--Steve 

When I checked my e-postbox, I found e-mail from tedd@...
<tedd@...> sent on 10/28/00 5:45 PM that said:

> I found it interesting that Steve said:
> 
>> You guys should run these comparison timings with extensions off, in order
>> for them to make any sense.
> 
> So, I tried it. With my extensions off,  the processing time was 53.87
> ticks (0.897 seconds) instead of 37.68 ticks (0.628 seconds) -- that's only
> 70% as fast as it was. Having the extensions off slowed it down. I think
> that the people who made the card also wrote an extension which helps the
> card out. Without the extension, it don't run as fast -- reminds me of
> speed doubler.