Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 12:20:15 +0100 (CET) From: Nick Hibma <n_hibma@webweaving.org> To: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: USB vs. parallel port Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.20.0001041215310.2117-100000@localhost> In-Reply-To: <199912261614.JAA07297@mt.sri.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Whether or not the system is loaded or not depends mainly on what hardware you have. OHCI tends to load the system a lot less than UHCI (Intel). But compared to serial and parallel ports, USB is a lot better. Most of the transaction is done per DMA and with large quantities it outperforms both of them in every way. 300Kb/s at less than 1% CPU should be no problem. I have no idea what the load on the PCI bus is though. That might be a problem as there are a lot of small transfers over that bus. By the way, at the moment it is better to have a UHCI controller on your motherboard. Allthough the OHCI controller is much smarter and more efficient, support for it is not as stable as the support for UHCI controllers. Nick > A co-worker is looking into buying a printer, and was wondering which > kind would be better, USB and/or parallel. (There are also some that do > both). > > Parallel printers tend to load down the system when busy, but serial > devices tend to load them down even more, although USB is a whole > different animal. > > What are the trade-offs? > > Thanks for any help you can provide! > > > Nate > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message > -- n_hibma@webweaving.org n_hibma@freebsd.org USB project http://www.etla.net/~n_hibma/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.20.0001041215310.2117-100000>