From owner-freebsd-hardware Fri May 22 17:27:51 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA26901 for freebsd-hardware-outgoing; Fri, 22 May 1998 17:27:51 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from pegasus.com (pegasus.com [206.127.225.31]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id RAA26871 for ; Fri, 22 May 1998 17:27:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from richard@pegasus.com) Received: by pegasus.com (8.6.8/PEGASUS-2.2) id OAA15093; Fri, 22 May 1998 14:27:20 -1000 Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 14:27:20 -1000 From: richard@pegasus.com (Richard Foulk) Message-Id: <199805230027.OAA15093@pegasus.com> In-Reply-To: Hugh LaMaster "Re: Seeking hardware recommendations" (May 22, 12:22pm) X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92) To: freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Seeking hardware recommendations Sender: owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org } > > Bay Networks Netgear FA310tx } > } > Ugh. Yet another DEC chipset. The Intel Etherexpress Pro100B is a bit } > faster, and uses less CPU (about 15% I believe). } } The DEC chipset cards are among the most widely supported/ } available, and, they are also a good choice for multicast, } and there are some nice, low-cost versions out there, too. } } [Yes, they don't have optimal alignment for copying and people } on these groups report 10-15% more CPU usage at the same } data rate. Nothing to merit an "Ugh", IMHO. Both chipsets } could be improved to adopt each other's advantages.] } Sounds like an `Ugh' to me. They're both available at low prices aren't they? Speed and efficiency for a network interface is usually important. Richard To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hardware" in the body of the message