From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 8 20:39:06 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC09516A407 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2007 20:39:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@wm-access.no) Received: from lakepoint.domeneshop.no (smtp01.domeneshop.no [194.63.248.15]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A65013C45E for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2007 20:39:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@wm-access.no) Received: from [192.168.0.100] (225.0.33.65.cfl.res.rr.com [65.33.0.225]) (authenticated bits=0) by lakepoint.domeneshop.no (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l08KImn2007440 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 8 Jan 2007 21:18:50 +0100 Message-ID: <45A2A720.3020905@wm-access.no> Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 15:18:40 -0500 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sten_Daniel_S=F8rsdal?= User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (Windows/20061207) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brett Glass References: <200701040541.WAA15207@lariat.net> In-Reply-To: <200701040541.WAA15207@lariat.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Sunnz , freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: What is the best supported Wireless card? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 20:39:06 -0000 Brett Glass wrote: > At 10:09 PM 1/3/2007, Sunnz wrote: > =20 >> I am looking to build a new desktop which is going to have wireless >> access through my router. >> >> I have been using Atheros's chipset with the ath drivers, yes it works= =2E.. >> >> But after read this article: http://www.thejemreport.com/mambo/content= /view/293 >> >> I begin to think if there are better vendors out there? >> >> From the article it seems that Ralink and Atmel are the most >> co-operative vendors to open source communities... >> >> So how good do you think they are? >=20 > The best for 802.11b (not g, alas) is undoubtedly the Intersil=20 > Prism 2.5 and kin. This is in large measure because the chipset > contains a lot of embedded intelligence. The load on the host > CPU is therefore very light and there's less opportunity for > coding mistakes in the host driver. And the embedded firmware=20 > is now as about error-free as any wireless code is going to get. > Atmel's 802.11b chipsets use the Intersil Prism, by the way. >=20 Doesn't Intersil Prism chipsets require alot of PIO (non-DMA) operations to communicate and therefore tax the host CPU considerably? I was to understand the reason the Prism chipsets are considered so inefficient in comparison to Atheros was the time wasteful interaction. Perhaps i was under the wrong impression? --=20 Sten Daniel S=F8rsdal