Cool stuff. I actually use pfs3 on Amithlon/OS3.9 as from my experiences its the most reliable 68k file system around. Speed wise sfs I think is faster, but that may also be due to better support for harddrive controller of my old amithlon computer.... the difference seems pretty small though in "feel" between the 2 on better supported athlon64 3200+ using sfs vs. core2duo@3.35ghz/not at good well supported core logic chipset/pfs3 (same 120gig ide drive). At a guess I'd say it's about 15 meg for pfs3 and 20 meg for sfs (sure, slow by modern standards, but really there's very little software on os3.x that needs massive throughput, and those that could theoretically benefit will become cpu/ram bound first (although having said that high quality dvd rips, for example, at original resoultion run fine). If anyone wants actual benchmark figures I guess I could set up an sfs partition again to test, but unless someone asks, I couldnt be bothered screwing around with partitions, Im pretty happy with how I've got my os3.9 install setup at the moment :-)
