Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 20:37:58 -0700 (MST) From: Charles Mott <cmott@srv.net> To: FreeBSD Hackers <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: 3com 3c509 card Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971215203225.5141C-100000@darkstar.home> In-Reply-To: <199712160244.NAA00629@word.smith.net.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Nope. They're both PIO cards, and the 'ed' driver spits all over the > 'ep' driver. Any inversions you may have seen would have been > environmental relating to the different behaviour of the various chips > relating to bus traffic. > > Yes, I've used both. Yes, I've seen > 1000K/sec out of an 'ed' card on > a 486/50. With modern processors, yes, the differences are less > evident, but I'll still take an NE2000 over a 509 anyday. Especially > when a single-chip card based on something like the RTL2019 costs less > than AUD$40, and "just works". > > mike > I've gotten 700 Kbytes/sec for sustained transfers on an NE 2000 clone on a 386/33 under 2.2.2. Performance under 2.1.x was 300 Kbytes/sec. Something radically improved in the 2.1->2.2 transition. I had thought it was the core networking code, but I am wondering if the driver improved also. Sometimes slow CPUs are good indicators of software improvements. Charles Mott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.971215203225.5141C-100000>