Date: Wed, 25 Feb 1998 12:56:50 -0800 From: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> To: Karl Denninger <karl@mcs.net> Cc: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>, freebsd@isvara.net, FreeBSD Hackers <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: "Best" Fast Ethernet Card Message-ID: <199802252056.MAA20915@dingo.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 25 Feb 1998 14:38:51 CST." <19980225143851.34237@mcs.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Wed, Feb 25, 1998 at 12:05:40PM -0800, Mike Smith wrote: > > > > Low system overhead is the key here. I'm starting to see things that look a > > > > lot like system CPU starvation with the SMC Etherpower 10/100s here on some > > > > of our fileservers. > > > > > > The recently released 3com Fast Etherink XL (rev B) 3C905B NIC is the best money > > > can buy (apart from server cards costing upwards of 250UKP). > > > It has lower CPU usage than any other card, helping it to give the fastest > > > performance. > > > > Uh, FTL has one of these. It seems to work just fine, but I would say > > that at least for FreeBSD the Intel EtherExpress Pro 100B still gives > > you the best throughput:overhead ratio. > > Hmmm... two opinions eh? :-) More than. 8) > Is the SMC worse than either? By how much? Which SMC? David G. has compared the 'de' driver against the 'fxp' (Old SMC vs. EtherExpress Pro 100B) and concluded that the latter is slightly more efficient. I don't know about the new SMC; until someone gives me a benchmark that I can apply all I can say is "it works". -- \\ Sometimes you're ahead, \\ Mike Smith \\ sometimes you're behind. \\ mike@smith.net.au \\ The race is long, and in the \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ end it's only with yourself. \\ msmith@cdrom.com 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?199802252056.MAA20915>