Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 11:29:52 +0100 From: "Steven Hartland" <killing@multiplay.co.uk> To: "Jack Vogel" <jfvogel@gmail.com>, "Danny Braniss" <danny@cs.huji.ac.il> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: em blues Message-ID: <01ad01c6ede9$5e4ee730$b3db87d4@multiplay.co.uk> References: <E1GXeiv-0007hw-4u@cs1.cs.huji.ac.il> <2a41acea0610111051r36ad7200gef868593e34c9331@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jack Vogel wrote:
> On 10/11/06, Danny Braniss <danny@cs.huji.ac.il> wrote:
>> the box is a bit old (Intel Pentium III (933.07-MHz 686-class CPU)
>> dual cpu.
>> running iperf -c (receiving):
>>
>> freebsd-4.10 0.0-10.0 sec 936 MBytes 785 Mbits/sec
>> freebsd-5.4 0.0-10.0 sec 413 MBytes 346 Mbits/sec
>> freebsd.6.1 0.0-10.0 sec 366 MBytes 307 Mbits/sec
>> freebsd-6.2 0.0-10.0 sec 344 MBytes 289 Mbits/sec
> You arent measuring em, you're measuring RELEASES on
> your hardware, is this a surprise on a P3, no.
>
> I still do 930ish Mb/s on a P4 with a PCI-E or PCI-X adaptors
> running 6.1, in fact can do that with a 4 port adaptor I believe.
Old hardware or not I'd say they are interesting results as
there should be no real reason why we need the most up to
date hardware not to loose out on performance.
Out of interest Danny how do the various OS compare when
using a single CPU kernel?
Steve
================================================
This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in it.
In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please telephone +44 845 868 1337
or return the E.mail to postmaster@multiplay.co.uk.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?01ad01c6ede9$5e4ee730$b3db87d4>