Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 06:39:30 +1000 From: Richard Laxton <richard@real.net.au> To: dg@root.com Cc: freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Intel EtherExpress vs DEC PCI chipsets Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970616063930.00b433d0@pop.real.net.au> In-Reply-To: <199706100055.RAA02337@implode.root.com> References: <Your message of "Tue, 10 Jun 1997 08:53:40 %2B1000." <3.0.1.32.19970610085340.00ae7a80@pop.real.net.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
David, Thanks that is good news. Especially since I can get the intel for $5 *less* than a no-name brand DEC card... wierd. Richard. At 17:55 9/06/97 -0700, David Greenman wrote: >>Secondly, Do I use Intel EtherExpress 100B TX cards or the DEC 240xx type >>cards? Does either have a CPU advantage? Are there any stability issues >>with either card? What are people's experiences? I have seen conflicting >>reports from this list ranging from "don't get the intel" to ftp.cdrom.com >>uses the intel (so it must be good). > > The Intel Pro/100B driver is much more CPU efficient than the DEC driver >and is well supported by the author (me). The only known problem at the moment >is that the newer Pro/100B's have a different PHY chip that the driver doesn't >yet know about and this results in full duplex operation not working with >those cards. This is a temporary situation, however, and will be fixed as soon >as I get one of the newer cards, the proper documentation, and my ethernet >switch working again. > >-DG > >David Greenman >Core-team/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3.0.1.32.19970616063930.00b433d0>