Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 12:48:52 +0200 From: Danny Braniss <danny@cs.huji.ac.il> To: "Steven Hartland" <killing@multiplay.co.uk> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Jack Vogel <jfvogel@gmail.com>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: em blues Message-ID: <E1GXy7Q-00021o-Gn@cs1.cs.huji.ac.il> In-Reply-To: <01ad01c6ede9$5e4ee730$b3db87d4@multiplay.co.uk> References: <E1GXeiv-0007hw-4u@cs1.cs.huji.ac.il> <2a41acea0610111051r36ad7200gef868593e34c9331@mail.gmail.com> <01ad01c6ede9$5e4ee730$b3db87d4@multiplay.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Jack Vogel wrote: > > On 10/11/06, Danny Braniss <danny@cs.huji.ac.il> wrote: > >> the box is a bit old (Intel Pentium III (933.07-MHz 686-class CPU) > >> dual cpu. > >> running iperf -c (receiving): > >> > >> freebsd-4.10 0.0-10.0 sec 936 MBytes 785 Mbits/sec > >> freebsd-5.4 0.0-10.0 sec 413 MBytes 346 Mbits/sec > >> freebsd.6.1 0.0-10.0 sec 366 MBytes 307 Mbits/sec > >> freebsd-6.2 0.0-10.0 sec 344 MBytes 289 Mbits/sec > > You arent measuring em, you're measuring RELEASES on > > your hardware, is this a surprise on a P3, no. > > > > I still do 930ish Mb/s on a P4 with a PCI-E or PCI-X adaptors > > running 6.1, in fact can do that with a 4 port adaptor I believe. > > Old hardware or not I'd say they are interesting results as > there should be no real reason why we need the most up to > date hardware not to loose out on performance. > and eol threats :-) > Out of interest Danny how do the various OS compare when > using a single CPU kernel? i don't have any UP kernels, but i'll make one for 6.2 an let you know. danny
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E1GXy7Q-00021o-Gn>