Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 00:02:01 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> To: Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com> Cc: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com>, Cory Kempf <ckempf@enigami.com>, Bill Paul <wpaul@skynet.ctr.columbia.edu>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Gigabit ethernet -- what am I doing wrong? Message-ID: <199903150802.AAA96407@apollo.backplane.com> References: <199903142046.MAA87857@rah.star-gate.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
:
:Not sure what the problem here is . Can a network chipset designer create a
:chipset
:with a concept of a program store? The answer is yes , if they chose to
:implement
:a sloppy design thats a different issue.
:
: Amancio
You'd have to stuff wayyyy too much memory on the network card
to make it useful that way, and the increased performance would only
be helpful to a very small percentage of the market verses
using the computer's main memory for store. It just isn't cost
effective for a network card for the target audience. If the card
were made for a high-end router, it would be a different story. But
if you are talking PC architecture, you aren't talking high-end router.
If performance is a requirement, it's cheaper to use a motherboard
that has better main memory performance and perhaps even runs multiple
PCI busses or a 64 bit wide PCI bus ( verses the 32 bit wide PCI
that most people are used to ). You are more likely to see this then
you are to see a network card with a lot of on-card memory.
-Matt
Matthew Dillon
<dillon@backplane.com>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199903150802.AAA96407>