Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 11:25:36 +0200 From: Stefan Esser <se@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Howard Lew <hlew@www2.shoppersnet.com> Cc: Craig Johnston <craig@gnofn.org>, hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: poor memory bandwidth on ABIT IT5H rev 1.5 Message-ID: <19970610112536.48352@mi.uni-koeln.de> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.91.970609183922.16617A-100000@www2.shoppersnet.com>; from Howard Lew on Mon, Jun 09, 1997 at 07:12:07PM -0700 References: <Pine.GSO.3.95.970606163225.26412A-100000@sparkie.gnofn.org> <Pine.BSF.3.91.970609183922.16617A-100000@www2.shoppersnet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jun 9, Howard Lew <hlew@www2.shoppersnet.com> wrote: > I thought the TX was better than the VX, so I compared several > motherboards with dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/null bs=1m count=1000 > > CPU is AMD K5-PR133 > > FIC PT2006 (Intel VX) with 256K PB Cache & FreeBSD-2.1.7.1R > Got 65MB/s > > FreeTech F63T (Intel VX) with 256K PB Cache & FreeBSD-2.1.7.1R > Got 62MB/s > > FreeTech F79 (Intel TX) with 512K PB Cache & FreeBSD-3.0SNAP-6/6/97 > Got 43MB/s Does the code in FreeBSD-current use the FPU bcopy for the AMD K5 ??? > > Is there something different about 3.0SNAP6/6/97? Is there any option > parameter for the kernel config for the K5-PR133? Unfortunately, 2 > parameters changed, so I can't tell if it is the MB or the OS. I decided > to go with 3.0snap because of this missing TX PCI & IDE drivers. You won't see much of a difference between 2.1.x and -current, with regard to chip-set support. The TX does not need any specific code, and I doubt that the EIDE code in -current know about the TX IDE chip ... So you could have used 2.1.7 for the TX as well! > All three tests were done with 32MB EDO memory (set to best memory > settings). The VX is known to perform badly with EDO, and just very slightly better than a TX (with EDO), if the VX got SDRAM modules ... Regards, STefan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19970610112536.48352>