From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Aug 31 10:51:14 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14F7B16A447 for ; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 10:51:14 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from Emanuel.strobl@gmx.net) Received: from mail.gmx.net (imap.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4C39243D45 for ; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 10:51:12 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from Emanuel.strobl@gmx.net) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 31 Aug 2005 10:51:11 -0000 Received: from flb.schmalzbauer.de (EHLO cale.flintsbach.schmalzbauer.de) [62.245.232.135] by mail.gmx.net (mp019) with SMTP; 31 Aug 2005 12:51:11 +0200 X-Authenticated: #301138 From: Emanuel Strobl To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 12:50:57 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.1 References: <200508310046.20808@harrymail> In-Reply-To: X-Birthday: Oct. 6th 1972 X-CelPhone: +49 (0) 173 9967781 X-Tel: +49 (0) 89 18947781 X-Country: Germany X-Address: Munich, 80686 X-OS: FreeBSD MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1556247.sde3txPsPg"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200508311251.06884@harrymail> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Subject: Re: GbE NICs besides em (recommendation wanted) X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 10:51:14 -0000 --nextPart1556247.sde3txPsPg Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Am Mittwoch, 31. August 2005 10:51 CEST schrieb Dmitry Mityugov: > On 8/31/05, Emanuel Strobl wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I'm quiet disappointed with the em nics and wanted to try some other > > GigaBit NICs (1000baseTX only). > > AFAIK there are re, sk, bge driven cards. Which doesn't saturate a > > PIII@800 at 200mbit/s with interrupt load (like em does)? > > I heard that the re is way better than the not so well rl and although > > much cheaper than em more efficient. > > What about bge? Or sk? Any comments welcome, also if I missed a > > supported family (TX only) > > I have a gigabit card managed by re and sk drivers at home IIRC > (PIII@866, 2xPIII@1400). I can run some tests for you this weekend if > you wish. Thank you for the offer, but I thought people had some simple test results= =20 in mind. If you next time use rdump or large NFS transfers to another GbE=20 connected (and fast enough) box just watch the system load (I use systat=20 =2Dvm 1) and see what card causes what interrupt load. em cards can't=20 transfer (real files over FTP/NFS) more than 200mbit/s on a=20 Coppermine@866, at this level the system load is 100% of which ~80% is=20 interrupt systemload :( Thanks, =2DHarry --nextPart1556247.sde3txPsPg Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBDFYuaBylq0S4AzzwRAhCuAKCBnr6hAuQR4GbW+7fBArqxTCLFJACgk1t/ 6Scl0QOZ49JhLM4xexKkRQQ= =FP6N -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1556247.sde3txPsPg--