Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 22 Apr 1997 20:17:48 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Doug White <dwhite@gdi.uoregon.edu>
To:        Jaime Bozza <wheelman@nuc.net>
Cc:        questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Driver Question
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.3.96.970422201402.1074A-100000@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970422175640.805A-100000@lepton.nuc.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 22 Apr 1997, Jaime Bozza wrote:

> > The 3c900 has very little onboard cache; if this machine is going to be
> > busy, you may not want to use this. 
> 
> Ok, thanks for the response. <G>  Any recommendations then for PCI-based
> cards?  Is the 3C905 (10/100) card better at all?  Or should I just stick
> with my trusty 3C509's? 

The 900 is 10/100 as well, if I remember correctly.  The 905 may be
better.  (It may have less cache because the PCI bus is probed faster than
the ISA bus is...)

> Or, perhaps, another manufacturer?  Have you heard much about the Intel
> PCI Ethernet cards?

The Intel EtherExpress Pro/100B is supported quite well in FreeBSD; also
any DE21x4x based cards (Kingston, SMC, Accton, Dayna, others) work very
nicely.  

Is there a requirement for 100mbit?  The EtherExpress is known to work at
100 megabit.

Doug White                              | University of Oregon  
Internet:  dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu    | Residence Networking Assistant
http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~dwhite    | Computer Science Major




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.970422201402.1074A-100000>