> On 10/11/06, Danny Braniss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > the box is a bit old (Intel Pentium III (933.07-MHz 686-class CPU)
> > dual cpu.
> >
> > running iperf -c (receiving):
> >
> > freebsd-4.10 0.0-10.0 sec 936 MBytes 785 Mbits/sec
> > freebsd-5.4 0.0-10.0 sec 413 MBytes 346 Mbits/sec
> > freebsd.6.1 0.0-10.0 sec 366 MBytes 307 Mbits/sec
> > freebsd-6.2 0.0-10.0 sec 344 MBytes 289 Mbits/sec
> >
> > btw, iperf -s (xmitting) is slightly better
> > freebsd-4.10 0.0-10.0 sec 664 MBytes 558 Mbits/sec
> > freebsd-5.4 0.0-10.0 sec 390 MBytes 327 Mbits/sec
> > freebsd-6.1 0.0-10.0 sec 495 MBytes 415 Mbits/sec
> > freebsd-6.2 0.0-10.0 sec 487 MBytes 408 Mbits/sec
> >
> > so, it seems that as the release number increases, the em
> > throughput gets worse - or iperf is.
>
> You arent measuring em, you're measuring RELEASES on
> your hardware, is this a surprise on a P3, no.
>
I agree 100% with your first statement, but, if_em is useless without
the rest, and if it's not delivering, then something is wrong somewhere,
no necesarely with the em driver, but in how the system interacts.
> I still do 930ish Mb/s on a P4 with a PCI-E or PCI-X adaptors
> running 6.1, in fact can do that with a 4 port adaptor I believe.
i do get on certain combinations nice numbers:
Server listening on TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 64.0 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 1.08 GBytes 928 Mbits/sec
(the mb is Intel SWV).
which seems almost optimal, but on other platforms i get
[ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 654 MBytes 548 Mbits/sec
(the mb is Intel SE7501)
cheers,
danny
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
