Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 16 Dec 1997 11:59:18 +0000 (GMT)
From:      Andrew Gordon <arg@arg1.demon.co.uk>
To:        John Kelly <jak@cetlink.net>
Cc:        FreeBSD Hackers <hackers@freebsd.org>, Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>
Subject:   Re: 3com 3c509 card 
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.3.91.971216115308.12854C-100000@server.arg.sj.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <34964c48.30733173@mail.cetlink.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 16 Dec 1997, John Kelly wrote:

> On Mon, 15 Dec 1997 23:51:31 -0800 (PST), Tom <tom@sdf.com> wrote:
> 
> >  Also, the ed driver supports shared memory cards like the SMC Ultra 16.
> >Fastest ISA ethernet you can get.
> 
> I replaced an NE2000 clone with a SMC Ultra 16, thinking shared memory
> would consume far less CPU than PIO with an NE2000.  But it seems to
> be about the same.

Have you got a _real_ (no longer available) Ultra here?  Testing with FTP 
(on a 486), I get about 600-700kbyte/sec with NE2000s, and 900-1000kbyte/s
with SMC Ultra.  However, the "EtherEZ" which has replaced the Ultra 
appears to be a bit of a lemon - giving rather inconsistent performance
(dropped packets) and even when not dropping packets, worse throughput 
than the Ultra.  This appears to be due to its reduced buffer size (8K 
vs. 16K); also, I notice that it only has one chip for the 8K RAM (vs. 2 
chips on the Ultra) - so, although still notionally a 16-bit card, I 
suspect it might be multiplexing accesses to a single 8-bit wide device 
and hence needing to insert wait states.  I haven't actually proven this 
theory, but the performance is certainluy not good.

(above tests done with several examples of each type, so I'm not 
suffering from faulty cards).



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.91.971216115308.12854C-100000>