From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 23 01:04:21 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60F34198 for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 01:04:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cswiger@mac.com) Received: from st11p05mm-asmtp002.mac.com (st11p05mm-asmtpout005.mac.com [17.172.108.250]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3476225DC for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 01:04:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [17.198.13.205] (unknown [17.198.13.205]) by st11p05mm-asmtp002.mac.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-27.08(7.0.4.27.7) 64bit (built Aug 22 2013)) with ESMTPSA id <0MV300HPJHIVZHA0@st11p05mm-asmtp002.mac.com> for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 00:04:08 +0000 (GMT) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.10.8794,1.0.431,0.0.0000 definitions=2013-10-22_07:2013-10-22,2013-10-22,1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1308280000 definitions=main-1310220123 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii MIME-version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\)) Subject: Re: FreeBSD, Centos and ZFS - SOLVED From: Charles Swiger In-reply-to: <25C055B9-4A19-46C8-B78E-AC8BD6E00CD9@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 17:04:06 -0700 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Message-id: <852AD883-D21A-4E34-9907-BF78696DE069@mac.com> References: <1381600575.18393.33219025.5D7B78D0@webmail.messagingengine.com> <8CA809B3-1692-4760-A63F-9D7451EB49BD@gmail.com> <525D143B.50202@gmail.com> <1382285088.2462.36238881.1AA6BB17@webmail.messagingengine.com> <25C055B9-4A19-46C8-B78E-AC8BD6E00CD9@gmail.com> To: aurfalien X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510) Cc: FreeBSD - X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 01:04:21 -0000 Hi-- On Oct 22, 2013, at 4:40 PM, aurfalien wrote: > OMG, what a relief... the ~30% diff in performance was due to a BIOS = setting, in particular this one; >=20 > Intel Turbo Boost Technology This is Intel's automatic overclocking, which mainly ups the speed on = multicore CPUs if some of the cores are idle leaving thermal headroom. You usually = want this on for best performance. > Enhanced Intel SpeedStep Tech This is dynamic power management involving lower clock frequencies and = usually voltages; it reduces power consumption, but can also reduce performance for some = workloads if not properly tuned. Leaving it off for best performance is = reasonable. Regards, --=20 -Chuck