From owner-freebsd-current Thu May 7 16:21:07 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA28831 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Thu, 7 May 1998 16:21:07 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from pop.uniserve.com (pop.uniserve.com [204.244.156.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id QAA28801 for ; Thu, 7 May 1998 16:20:51 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tom@uniserve.com) Received: from shell.uniserve.ca [204.244.186.218] by pop.uniserve.com with smtp (Exim 1.82 #4) id 0yXZxz-0002eA-00; Thu, 7 May 1998 16:20:43 -0700 Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 16:20:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Tom X-Sender: tom@shell.uniserve.ca To: "Dan Ts'o" cc: Snob Art Genre , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Intel Etherexpress PRO/100+ PCI In-Reply-To: <199805072131.RAA16674@dna.rockefeller.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, 7 May 1998, Dan Ts'o wrote: > > As I understand it, the PRO/100+ is just a PRO/100B, but fabricated > > differently -- they figured out how to do it with one less chip. But > > the interface is the same. > > An Intel support engineer told me that, although very similar, the > Pro/100+ and Pro/100B are not identical at the software/driver level and The FreeBSD fxp0 driver supports both. The Pro100+ is basically the same as the Pro100B except that the Pro100+ combines two chips into one. I would always get the Pro100+, as it is probably more reliable (lower power consumption too). See archives. Tom To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message