From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Jul 31 02:41:02 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id CAA23167 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 31 Jul 1997 02:41:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sparkie.gnofn.org (sparkie.gnofn.org [206.27.168.35]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id CAA23150 for ; Thu, 31 Jul 1997 02:40:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sparkie.gnofn.org (sparkie.gnofn.org [206.27.168.35]) by sparkie.gnofn.org (8.7.Beta.10/8.7.Beta.10) with SMTP id EAA27604; Thu, 31 Jul 1997 04:40:11 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 04:40:11 -0500 (CDT) From: Craig Johnston To: Charles Henrich cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Pentium II? In-Reply-To: <199707301500.LAA01362@crh.cl.msu.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Wed, 30 Jul 1997, Charles Henrich wrote: > > >The real issue is that the PII is untried, whereas FreeBSD systems > >on PPro hardware, like ftp.cdrom.com (which serves 2000 simultaneous > >ftp users) have been ticking along reliably for quite some time > processors together, and I dont give a rip what the connection is. I require > performance for my apps, and there's nothing on the planet that will > (currently) touch a P-II/300. Digital might beg to differ. -Craig