Performance Intel Pro 1000 MT (PWLA8490MT)
Bosko Milekic
bmilekic at technokratis.com
Wed Apr 20 07:55:22 PDT 2005
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 08:56:03PM -0700, Jin Guojun [VFFS] wrote:
> Bruce Evans wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 19 Apr 2005, Bosko Milekic wrote:
> >
> >> My experience with 6.0-CURRENT has been that I am able to push at
> >> least about 400kpps INTO THE KERNEL from a gigE em card on its own
> >> 64-bit PCI-X 133MHz bus (i.e., the bus is uncontested) and that's
> >
> >
> >A 64-bit bus doesn't seem to be essential for reasonable performance.
> >
> >I get about 210 kpps (receive) for a bge card on an old Athlon system
> >with a 32-bit PCI 33MHz bus. Overclocking this bus speeds up at least
> >sending almost proportionally to the overclocking :-). This is with
> >my version of an old version of -current, with no mpsafenet, no driver
> >tuning, and no mistuning (no INVARIANTS, etc., no POLLING, no HZ > 100).
> >Sending goes slightly slower (about 200 kppps).
>
> Yes, 64-bit is not essential for getting 400~700 Mbps as long as the system
> has enough high memory bandwidth, but it is essential to get full Gigabits.
>
> Simple numbers are in "Tips" section at the bottom of the following page:
>
> http://www-didc.lbl.gov/NCS/generic/ncs-00.html
>
> and the details are described in the papers linked.
>
> P.S. Question the unit "kpps" used in original email. I am not sure
> what this really means.
> GigE is possible to produce 400 kpps if packet size is 300
> bytes or less.
> If packet size is 1500 byte, the maximum pps is 83k (83kpps).
> But, 200-400 kbps is kind low, maybe I missed some previous
> emails.
Obviously we're talking about small packets. :-)
--
Bosko Milekic
bmilekic at technokratis.com
bmilekic at FreeBSD.org
More information about the freebsd-performance
mailing list