From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Oct 16 14:09:22 2006
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52AD916A494
	for <freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org>;
	Mon, 16 Oct 2006 14:09:22 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from lgusenet@be-well.ilk.org)
Received: from mail3.sea5.speakeasy.net (mail3.sea5.speakeasy.net
	[69.17.117.5]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC28043D4C
	for <freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org>;
	Mon, 16 Oct 2006 14:09:21 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from lgusenet@be-well.ilk.org)
Received: (qmail 13917 invoked from network); 16 Oct 2006 14:09:21 -0000
Received: from dsl092-078-145.bos1.dsl.speakeasy.net (HELO be-well.ilk.org)
	([66.92.78.145]) (envelope-sender <lgusenet@be-well.ilk.org>)
	by mail3.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP
	for <freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org>; 16 Oct 2006 14:09:21 -0000
Received: by be-well.ilk.org (Postfix, from userid 1147)
	id 1328F2842E; Mon, 16 Oct 2006 10:09:19 -0400 (EDT)
To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org
References: <44wt738057.fsf@be-well.ilk.org>
	<78ED28FACE63744386D68D8A9D1CF5D4209C94@MAIL.corp.lumeta.com>
	<200610140308.00451.soralx@cydem.org>
	<200610150041.59870.soralx@cydem.org>
From: Lowell Gilbert <lgusenet@be-well.ilk.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 10:09:19 -0400
In-Reply-To: <200610150041.59870.soralx@cydem.org> (soralx@cydem.org's message
	of "Sun, 15 Oct 2006 00:41:59 -0700")
Message-ID: <44u0241hf4.fsf@be-well.ilk.org>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (berkeley-unix)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Subject: Re: Quiet computer
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware <freebsd-hardware.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hardware>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-hardware-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hardware>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hardware-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hardware>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-hardware-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 14:09:22 -0000

soralx@cydem.org writes:

>> I don't really care how fast the crypto engine is on my Via system.
>
> neither do I care how fast it is on someone else's system :p, but I'm

Fair enough.  Its speed on your own system may matter less to you than
you think, as well. ;-)

> just curious whether the speed VIA claims, 25Gbps(!) peak is achievable

Peak rate is a useless number.  If it were sustainable, it wouldn't be
quoted as a "peak" rate; and if it's not sustainable, it doesn't
affect the perceived performance.

>> I just care that it offloads the ALU.  I haven't gotten around to
>> proving whether (and by how much) it does so.
>
> did you get to the point that you're sure it's being used?

Yes.  it is.

>> > BTW... `ubench`? :)
>> 
>> Not impressive.
>
> you're using the same board as OP?

No, not at all; I didn't mean to imply I was.  I have the slowest (and
lowest powered) Via chips I could get.  The ubench numbers are
slightly lower than the Pentium II system it replaced, at a similar
clock rate.  Note that I didn't mean the numbers were bad, either...