From owner-freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 8 07:58:48 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG Delivered-To: freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C36516A401; Thu, 8 Mar 2007 07:58:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (lurza.secnetix.de [83.120.8.8]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F4E013C478; Thu, 8 Mar 2007 07:58:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (kvenmb@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l287wcmN019624; Thu, 8 Mar 2007 08:58:44 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from oliver.fromme@secnetix.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.1/Submit) id l287wb5m019623; Thu, 8 Mar 2007 08:58:37 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from olli) Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 08:58:37 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <200703080758.l287wb5m019623@lurza.secnetix.de> From: Oliver Fromme To: freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG, anderson@FreeBSD.ORG, etc@fluffles.net, ivoras@fer.hr In-Reply-To: X-Newsgroups: list.freebsd-geom User-Agent: tin/1.8.2-20060425 ("Shillay") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.11-STABLE (i386)) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.1.2 (lurza.secnetix.de [127.0.0.1]); Thu, 08 Mar 2007 08:58:44 +0100 (CET) Cc: Subject: Re: Some Unix benchmarks for those who are interesed X-BeenThere: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG, anderson@FreeBSD.ORG, etc@fluffles.net, ivoras@fer.hr List-Id: GEOM-specific discussions and implementations List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 07:58:48 -0000 Eric Anderson wrote: > On 03/07/07 23:13, Fluffles wrote: > > The low Per Char results would lead me to believe it's a very slow CPU; > > maybe VIA C3 or some old pentium? Modern systems should get 100MB/s+ in > > per-char bonnie benchmark, even a Sempron 2600+ 1.6GHz 128KB cache which > > costs about $39. > > Before making speculative claims about slow CPU's and putting the VIA C3 > in with that pile, please at least refer to what makes you believe that > it is an issue. Comparing the VIA C3 to 'some old pentium' isn't > exactly fair or accurate, and inferring it isn't a modern system isn't > true either. I agree that a C3 can be modern (depending on its age). However, it is indeed rather slow. I happen to have a C3 1 GHz as my private router, firewall and file server. For that purpose it is completely sufficient, and I prefer it over anything like a Sempron for the low power consumption. But its raw processor performance is on the same level as an old Pentium with about half the clock rate, i.e. something like a Pentium2 500 MHz in my case (I also happen to have a Celeron-466 so it's easy to make the comparison). For that reason I prefer not to compile anything on it, but rather do that on a faster machine and then copy things over. My intel Centrino notebook is at least five times faster than that C3. Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing b. M. Handelsregister: Registergericht Muenchen, HRA 74606, Geschäftsfuehrung: secnetix Verwaltungsgesellsch. mbH, Handelsregister: Registergericht Mün- chen, HRB 125758, Geschäftsführer: Maik Bachmann, Olaf Erb, Ralf Gebhart FreeBSD-Dienstleistungen, -Produkte und mehr: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd "C is quirky, flawed, and an enormous success." -- Dennis M. Ritchie.