From owner-freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 9 09:42:03 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 282E316A400; Fri, 9 Mar 2007 09:42:03 +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 9352C13C4A6; Fri, 9 Mar 2007 09:42:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (lqnune@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l299fneN065111; Fri, 9 Mar 2007 10:41:54 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from oliver.fromme@secnetix.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.1/Submit) id l299fm6P065108; Fri, 9 Mar 2007 10:41:48 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from olli) Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2007 10:41:48 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <200703090941.l299fm6P065108@lurza.secnetix.de> From: Oliver Fromme To: freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG, anderson@FreeBSD.ORG, etc@fluffles.net, ivoras@fer.hr In-Reply-To: <45F0EE1D.1020201@freebsd.org> 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]); Fri, 09 Mar 2007 10:41:54 +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: Fri, 09 Mar 2007 09:42:03 -0000 Eric Anderson wrote: > Oliver Fromme wrote: > > Eric Anderson wrote: > > > 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. > > I'm making no claim they are as fast as a Core 2 Duo, or anything of the > like. But a P2-500? That's not realistic for most applications, but > maybe for a particular benchmark or two it might be. Just look on the > net for the countless benchmarks, and you'll see it usually is about in > line with the same age and MHz Celeron processor. I don't believe in benchmark numbers. They are often just synthetic without real-world relation, and often they're misinterpreted. Instead, I compare by the speed of real-world tasks, like compiling sources, which I need to do quite often, so it's an important thing to compare for me personally, or how much CPU percentage a media player requires. With such kind of real-world tasks, my 1000 MHz C3 is significantly slower than my 800 MHz Pentium-III, but just a little faster than my 466 MHz Celeron and a friend's 450 MHz Pentium-II. That's why I say it is close to a Pentium-II 500. Regarding power consumption: The complete mainboard with the 1 GHz C3 (an EPIA PD10000) consumes 15 W when idle, and not much more when under full load. That includes onboard components like graphics adapter, audio, USB etc. I'm currently considering to buy an ARM-based board (for different purposes). There are some supported by recent patches to 7-current. They consume only 1 to 2 W, but are also a little slower than the C3. However, I haven't found one yet that contains the onboard components that I need. 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 Python is executable pseudocode. Perl is executable line noise.