<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:s="http://updates.zdnet.com/">
<channel>
	<title><![CDATA[transfer rate Resources | ZDNet]]></title>
	<link><![CDATA[http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/transfer+rate.html]]></link>
	<description><![CDATA[White papers, case studies, technical articles, and blog posts relating to transfer rate]]></description>
	<s:counts start="0" returned="2" found="2" />
	<language>en-us</language>
	<item>
		<title><![CDATA[The "money no object" desktop PC]]></title>
		<link><![CDATA[http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-12554-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=34428&messageID=633776&start=0]]></link>
		<description><![CDATA[The "money no object" desktop PCPity I upgraded 8 months ago...Had I waited, I'd have ditched AMD.  But, 3.5 years from now, AMD may overtake Intel again.SHouldn't you define what the system is to be used for?I mean a PC to run an Office suite would be quite different...]]></description>
		<s:doctype><![CDATA[Discussion threads]]></s:doctype>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2007 10:15:00 -0700</pubDate>
		<category domain="http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/microsoft+windows+vista+%2528longhorn%2529.html"><![CDATA[Microsoft Windows Vista (Longhorn)]]></category>
		<category domain="http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/desktops.html"><![CDATA[Desktops]]></category>
		<category domain="http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/monitors+%2526+displays.html"><![CDATA[Monitors & displays]]></category>
		<category domain="http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/transfer+rate.html"><![CDATA[Transfer Rate]]></category>
		<category domain="http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/desktop.html"><![CDATA[desktop]]></category>
		<category domain="http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/projector.html"><![CDATA[projector]]></category>
		<category domain="http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/microsoft+windows+vista.html"><![CDATA[Microsoft Windows Vista]]></category>
		<category domain="http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/pc.html"><![CDATA[PC]]></category>
		<category domain="http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/desktop+computer.html"><![CDATA[desktop computer]]></category>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title><![CDATA[Faster Fujitsu drive plays catch-up]]></title>
		<link><![CDATA[http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-9584-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=2119&messageID=44596&start=0]]></link>
		<description><![CDATA[Faster Fujitsu drive plays catch-upRPMs and transfer rateI would like to note that RPM of disk have rather influence on latency that is expressed in milliseconds rather than transfer speed (Mbit/second).This is about so called access time.So putting transfer rate in context of RPM speed is not adequate.Transfer rate is...]]></description>
		<s:doctype><![CDATA[Discussion threads]]></s:doctype>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2004 15:33:00 -0800</pubDate>
		<category domain="http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/transfer+rate.html"><![CDATA[Transfer Rate]]></category>
		<category domain="http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/rpm.html"><![CDATA[RPM]]></category>
		<category domain="http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/latency.html"><![CDATA[latency]]></category>
		<category domain="http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/fujitsu+ltd..html"><![CDATA[Fujitsu Ltd.]]></category>
		<category domain="http://rss.financialcontent.com/stocksymbol">6702</category>
		<category domain="tickers">6702</category>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
