Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2007 10:41:48 +0100 (CET) From: Oliver Fromme <olli@lurza.secnetix.de> To: freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG, anderson@FreeBSD.ORG, etc@fluffles.net, ivoras@fer.hr Subject: Re: Some Unix benchmarks for those who are interesed Message-ID: <200703090941.l299fm6P065108@lurza.secnetix.de> In-Reply-To: <45F0EE1D.1020201@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Eric Anderson wrote: > Oliver Fromme wrote: > > Eric Anderson wrote: > > > Before making speculative claims about slow CPU's and putting the VIA C3 > > > in with that pile, please at least refer to what makes you believe that > > > it is an issue. Comparing the VIA C3 to 'some old pentium' isn't > > > exactly fair or accurate, and inferring it isn't a modern system isn't > > > true either. > > > > I agree that a C3 can be modern (depending on its age). > > However, it is indeed rather slow. I happen to have a > > C3 1 GHz as my private router, firewall and file server. > > For that purpose it is completely sufficient, and I > > prefer it over anything like a Sempron for the low power > > consumption. > > > > But its raw processor performance is on the same level > > as an old Pentium with about half the clock rate, i.e. > > something like a Pentium2 500 MHz in my case (I also > > happen to have a Celeron-466 so it's easy to make the > > comparison). For that reason I prefer not to compile > > anything on it, but rather do that on a faster machine > > and then copy things over. My intel Centrino notebook > > is at least five times faster than that C3. > > I'm making no claim they are as fast as a Core 2 Duo, or anything of the > like. But a P2-500? That's not realistic for most applications, but > maybe for a particular benchmark or two it might be. Just look on the > net for the countless benchmarks, and you'll see it usually is about in > line with the same age and MHz Celeron processor. I don't believe in benchmark numbers. They are often just synthetic without real-world relation, and often they're misinterpreted. Instead, I compare by the speed of real-world tasks, like compiling sources, which I need to do quite often, so it's an important thing to compare for me personally, or how much CPU percentage a media player requires. With such kind of real-world tasks, my 1000 MHz C3 is significantly slower than my 800 MHz Pentium-III, but just a little faster than my 466 MHz Celeron and a friend's 450 MHz Pentium-II. That's why I say it is close to a Pentium-II 500. Regarding power consumption: The complete mainboard with the 1 GHz C3 (an EPIA PD10000) consumes 15 W when idle, and not much more when under full load. That includes onboard components like graphics adapter, audio, USB etc. I'm currently considering to buy an ARM-based board (for different purposes). There are some supported by recent patches to 7-current. They consume only 1 to 2 W, but are also a little slower than the C3. However, I haven't found one yet that contains the onboard components that I need. Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing b. M. Handelsregister: Registergericht Muenchen, HRA 74606, Geschäftsfuehrung: secnetix Verwaltungsgesellsch. mbH, Handelsregister: Registergericht Mün- chen, HRB 125758, Geschäftsführer: Maik Bachmann, Olaf Erb, Ralf Gebhart FreeBSD-Dienstleistungen, -Produkte und mehr: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd Python is executable pseudocode. Perl is executable line noise.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200703090941.l299fm6P065108>