On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 16:06:17 +0200, in sentex.lists.freebsd.net you
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.
Hi,
What is your setup for testing ? For me, with a couple of em
NICs back to back I get
iperf -c 1.1.1.2
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 1.1.1.2, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 32.5 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[ 3] local 1.1.1.1 port 57584 connected with 1.1.1.2 port 5001
[ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 1.06 GBytes 914 Mbits/sec
6.2-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Oct 9 23:22:10 EDT 2006
One is a Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.00GHz and the other an AMD 3800 X2
Going the other way is about the same (900Mb)
---Mike
>
>danny
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
>http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
>To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
--------------------------------------------------------
Mike Tancsa, Sentex communications http://www.sentex.net
Providing Internet Access since 1994
[EMAIL PROTECTED], (http://www.tancsa.com)
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
