From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 4 17:54:27 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A188516A421 for ; Mon, 4 Jun 2007 17:54:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tundra@tundraware.com) Received: from eskimo.tundraware.com (eskimo.tundraware.com [66.92.130.161]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EF0A13C455 for ; Mon, 4 Jun 2007 17:54:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tundra@tundraware.com) Received: from [192.168.0.2] (viper.tundraware.com [192.168.0.2]) (authenticated bits=0) by eskimo.tundraware.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l54HsJc1051377 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-DSS-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 4 Jun 2007 12:54:19 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from tundra@tundraware.com) Message-ID: <466451CA.6020108@tundraware.com> Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 12:54:18 -0500 From: Tim Daneliuk User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (Windows/20070509) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-tundraware.com-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-tundraware.com-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-tundraware.com-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-4.399, required 1, autolearn=not spam, ALL_TRUSTED -1.80, BAYES_00 -2.60) X-tundraware.com-MailScanner-From: tundra@tundraware.com X-Spam-Status: No Subject: New != Faster X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 17:54:27 -0000 In the course of trying to work through some problems with a new MOBO, I did some speed test which I found sort of surprising: Old System ---------- Dual PIII 600Mhz w/768K Mem and Mylex RAID 5 with old 9G SCSI drived FBSD 4.11-Stable Writing a 1G file to /dev/null with dd reports about 26MB/sec New System ---------- Pentium D 3.2GHz w/2G Mem and SATA Drive reported running at SATA-150 FBSD 6.2-STABLE Writing a 2G file to /dev/null with dd reports about 50MB/sec So ... the new system should be much faster all the way around, right? Hmmmm, not necessarily so. 'buildworld' is only about 17% faster on the new machine v. the old. I would think that with way faster processors and twice the disk bandwidth I would have seen far reduced buildworld times. So, I decided to check a known fast machine. The results: Procs Mem dd Read OS buildworld Old 2 PIII @600Mhz 768K 26M/sec 4.11-stable/SMP 50-60 min New Pent D (2 core)@3.2GHz 2G 50M/sec 6.2-stable/SMP 40-50 min Fast 2 Xeon @3GHz 3G 130M/sec 4.11-stable/SMP 8 min So, now I'm confused. These are all lightly loaded systems but the buildworld time does not scale even approximately by either CPU or I/O performance. What the heck is going on, I wonder? It is possible, I suppose that the "New" machine does not have SMP running properly on it, though 'top' shows two CPUs working away. Is the difference in speed attributable to 4.11 being faster than 6.2? Unfortunately, I cannot get 4.11 to boot on the "New" machine - it does not like the hardware for some reason claiming: RTC BIOS diagnostic error 80 Even after I change the RTC battery on the mobo. Strange ... any input appreciated. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tim Daneliuk tundra@tundraware.com PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/