public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Barry K. Nathan" <barryn@pobox.com>
To: andrewm@uow.edu.au (Andrew Morton)
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: NIC recommendations (was Re: Repeatable 2.4.0-test13-pre4...)
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 15:01:18 -0800 (PST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200012302301.eBUN1IF01354@pobox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3A4DBC02.92C0FD9A@uow.edu.au> from "Andrew Morton" at Dec 30, 2000 09:42:10 PM

Andrew Morton wrote:
> The 3c905C is a well manufactured and very feature-rich NIC which at
> present appears to have fewer problem reports than eepro100, 8139 or tulip.

3c905c is a bit expensive, though. pcnet32 cards also work very well for
me, and are less expensive. The 905c could be a better card (I don't
really know), but pcnet32's might be more cost-effective, depending
on your needs. (I've seen pcnet32-based cards selling for $15-20, and
I bought a new 10-pack (of HP NightDirector 10/100's) for about $36,
including shipping, on eBay.)
 
In any case, tulips have been more problematic for me than 8139, pcnet32,
or 3c905c (whose reliability are all comparable IME). I've never tried
eepro100, though. (Also, I'm speaking in terms of my experiences across
all OS's which I've used the cards under, not just under Linux, although
my Linux experiences are similar to the experiences I've had overall.)

Anyway, those are my experiences and recommendations. YMMV. :)

-Barry K. Nathan <barryn@pobox.com>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  parent reply	other threads:[~2000-12-30 23:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2000-12-28 22:11 Repeatable 2.4.0-test13-pre4 nfsd Oops rears it head again Mike Elmore
2000-12-28 21:59 ` David S. Miller
2000-12-29  3:21   ` Mike Elmore
2000-12-29  3:47     ` Chris Wedgwood
2000-12-29  6:15     ` Linus Torvalds
2000-12-29 10:25       ` Chris Wedgwood
2000-12-30 10:42       ` Andrew Morton
2000-12-30 18:06         ` Francois Romieu
2000-12-30 23:01         ` Barry K. Nathan [this message]
2001-01-01 23:51           ` NIC recommendations (was Re: Repeatable 2.4.0-test13-pre4...) H. Peter Anvin
2000-12-29  8:14     ` Repeatable 2.4.0-test13-pre4 nfsd Oops rears it head again David Ford

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200012302301.eBUN1IF01354@pobox.com \
    --to=barryn@pobox.com \
    --cc=andrewm@uow.edu.au \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox