Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 14:40:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug Ambrisko <ambrisko@ambrisko.com> To: Bsdguru@aol.com Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 64bit Ethernet Card (if_sf driver) Message-ID: <200110042140.f94LeTT02809@ambrisko.com> In-Reply-To: <137.296ca27.28edf63e@aol.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bsdguru@aol.com writes: | I've been testing the adaptec 64044 card (if_sf driver) which is a 64bit | 66Mhz 4 port ethernet. I can have come to one of two conclusions: | | 1) the card sucks | 2) the driver sucks | | or both. A 32bit Dlink 4 port card outperforms it by a wide margin, as do | 32bit eepro100s. "wide margin" being defined as about 40%. | | Given that bus resources are not easily measureable..Im quoting cpu usage for | handling the same number of pps. But its pretty difficult to justify using a | 64bit slot and rather expensive card with such lousy performance. I cant even | justify the bus-bandwidth saving with a card that cant route more than | 250Mb/s. | | I guess my question has to do with whether the board is just a dog or the | driver needs substantial optimization. The folks at adaptec aren't dopes | generally, so I cant imagine that they chose a chipset that was so inferior | to the one on their 32bit adapter (which uses the same as the Dlink). | | Anyone with experience or ideas? I can just confirm your observations. I found that having it in a 64bit slot or 32bit made no difference. I hope it is a driver problem since Adaptec was selling a DEC based 4 port card that they got when they bought Cogent. I find it hard to believe that they would replace that with a poorer performance card that probably cost them more to make. Doug A. 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?200110042140.f94LeTT02809>