Date: Wed, 17 May 1995 21:19:01 -0700 From: "Justin T. Gibbs" <gibbs@estienne.CS.Berkeley.EDU> To: Tom Samplonius <tom@haven.uniserve.com> Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Adaptec 2940? Message-ID: <199505180419.VAA23995@estienne.cs.berkeley.edu> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 17 May 1995 19:30:38 PDT." <Pine.BSF.3.91.950517192321.5578C-100000@haven.uniserve.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >On Mon, 15 May 1995, Justin T. Gibbs wrote: > >> > Is it just me, or is the 2940 slower than the 1742 and 2742? >> > >> > (BTW, I'm running a kernel supped last week) >> > >> >Tom >> >> I'll let you know once I get my Pentium machine. :) I don't see >> any reason why it would be slower than a 2742. > > I swapped a ASUS AMD486DX4100 PCI with a 2940, for a AMI 486DX266 EISA >with a 2742, and found that "iozone auto" would give consistently better >results. Running top and running two dd's or two iozone's revealed that EISA >system was using less system and interrupt time for the same job. >I used a almost current kerenel and the same drives for both. > >Tom The drivers are identical, so the interupt time should be the same for driving either card on the same machine. Your benchmark is not really valid since they were run on different motherboards. -- Justin T. Gibbs ============================================== TCS Instructional Group - Programmer/Analyst 1 Cory | Po | Danube | Volga | Parker | Torus ==============================================
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199505180419.VAA23995>