From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Apr 2 09:06:13 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id JAA03093 for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 2 Apr 1995 09:06:13 -0700 Received: from mail.htp.com (mail.htp.com [199.171.4.2]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id JAA03087 for ; Sun, 2 Apr 1995 09:06:10 -0700 Received: from et.htp.com (et.htp.com [199.171.4.228]) by mail.htp.com (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id LAA01057 for ; Sun, 2 Apr 1995 11:54:27 -0400 Date: Sun, 2 Apr 1995 11:54:27 -0400 Message-Id: <199504021554.LAA01057@mail.htp.com> X-Sender: dennis@mail.htp.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 2.0.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: hackers@FreeBSD.org From: dennis@et.htp.com (dennis) Subject: Re: NE2000 Plus performance Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >Poking around with the configuration program of our ethernet cards >(NE2000 clones manufactured by Trust), I found out that they have a mode >(called NE2000 plus) in which they apparently use shared memory (at >least, the setup menu asks you to select a memory address. > >Is this mode supported by the current if_ed driver, and is it documented >anywhere ? (I am asking because I remember discussion on the relative >performance of WD80x3 -- better, using shared memory -- and NE2000 This NE2000+ is a pretty interesting character...its almost a contradiction. The only good reason (and it IS a good reason) to use an NE2000 is that you don't have to worry about conflicts with other adapters. But an NE2000 with shared memory really is just a non-compatible WD8013, since they both use the same processor. If they're as inexpensive as NE2000 clones though...now this would be good. We have an NE2000 driver for our VLB NE2000 that we could easily modify to support the NE2000+. Please give me some info on pricing and who sells them. If they cost the same or close to an SMC card, forget it. I'd rather use SMC. Dennis