Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2000 12:29:53 -0700 From: "Kenneth D. Merry" <ken@kdm.org> To: Matthew Jacob <mjacob@feral.com> Cc: Thomas Stromberg <tstromberg@rtci.com>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Suggestions for Gigabit cards for -CURRENT Message-ID: <20000203122953.A53875@panzer.kdm.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.10002031122280.64395-100000@semuta.feral.com>; from mjacob@feral.com on Thu, Feb 03, 2000 at 11:23:45AM -0800 References: <20000203122114.A53673@panzer.kdm.org> <Pine.BSF.4.05.10002031122280.64395-100000@semuta.feral.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Feb 03, 2000 at 11:23:45 -0800, Matthew Jacob wrote: > > > > I think the memory would come in handy on a heavily loaded system, since > > you would gain a little extra time in case you were a little late servicing > > interrupts. i.e. it would smooth out the bumps a little bit. > > Yes, but that's what having 8192 2KByte descriptors handy is for... (that's > 16MB of buffering). Are those all in card memory, or in host memory? What happens when you've got some other traffic on the PCI bus, and the card gets a little behind in DMAing its data into host memory? > > If your PCI implementation won't keep up with gigabit speeds, you'll just > > go slower. :) Most newer systems (e.g. 440BX) shouldn't have any trouble > > doing a reasonable amount of speed over gigabit ethernet, though. > > Typically I don't see higher than 60 or 70MB/s real throughput on most > systems. I've seen 100MB/sec on Pentium II 450's (440BX), and 90MB/sec on Pentium II 350's (440BX). Ken -- Kenneth Merry ken@kdm.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000203122953.A53875>