Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 03:34:48 +0100 From: Mark <admin@asarian-host.net> To: "Kent Stewart" <kstewart@owt.com>, <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Upload substantially slower than download Message-ID: <200212180234.GBI2YST65299@asarian-host.net> References: <200212170027.GBH0RUW29189@asarian-host.net> <00ff01c2a5c4$510ee960$34a8a8c0@melim.com.br> <200212180045.GBI0JWT41716@asarian-host.net> <200212171758.26323.kstewart@owt.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
----- Original Message ----- From: "Kent Stewart" <kstewart@owt.com> To: "Mark" <admin@asarian-host.net>; <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG> Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 2:58 AM Subject: Re: Upload substantially slower than download > I always got better perfomance out of the Intel 10/100 Pro. > They have 2x more cache memory than the 3Coms and the > xfer rate was about 1/3 faster. My motherboards with onboard > SiS900s out perform the Intels. I get 11-12 MB/s either way > with the onboards. I quit buying 3Coms at 3C509b's. What they > do now may have improved since then. Thanks for the advice! :) I found a cool card: the Intel PRO/1000 Gigabit Ethernet 82540EM (which will do 1G over CAT5). On the "FreeBSD 4.7R Hardware Notes" I found this comment: "Gigabit Ethernet NICs based on the Intel 82542 and 82543 controller chips (wx(4), gx(4) and em(4) drivers), plus NICs supported by the Intel 82540EM, 82544, 82545EM, and 82546EB controller chips (em(4) driver only). Note: The wx(4) driver is deprecated. Note: The em(4) driver is officially supported by Intel, but is only supported on the i386." Does that, in normal English, mean this card is supported? I'd hate to buy such a nice card, only to have it not work with FreeBSD 4.7R. Thanks again! - Mark To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200212180234.GBI2YST65299>