Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 02:21:47 +0100 (CET) From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> To: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> Cc: Roland Smith <rsmith@xs4all.nl>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: send performance of rl(4) Message-ID: <20081215021910.K50734@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> In-Reply-To: <20081215004856.9d2f08ca.freebsd@edvax.de> References: <20081214143905.GA9275@slackbox.xs4all.nl> <20081214154452.O49468@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <20081214150455.GA11318@slackbox.xs4all.nl> <20081214163257.X49611@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <20081214232501.GA2274@slackbox.xs4all.nl> <20081215004206.M50522@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <20081215004856.9d2f08ca.freebsd@edvax.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > I always found Realtek cards okay because they would work > everywhere, nearly every OS supported them. But especially > the RTL8139, if I remember correctly, was so busy generating > IRQs that it didn't find the time to have a good performance. :-) but it works very well. in places when there is no high traffic constantly i happily use them. > Maybe Realteks newer models perform better. at least my gigabit realtek integrated with motherboard was buggy, disabling hardware checksumming fixed it PARTIALLY. but still it do locks up every month or so of heavy traffic. > I'm quite happy with 3Com's and Intel's NICs, I usually give > away Realtek NICs along with computer systems I built for > others. esp. with windows there is not much difference. other os overhead is larger than interrupt overhead. anyway - it's primitive hardware, but WORKING :)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20081215021910.K50734>