From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Benjamin LaHaise Subject: Re: FSCKED clock sources WAS(Re: [WIP][PATCHES] Network xmit batching Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 13:08:07 -0400 Message-ID: <20070625170807.GH971@kvack.org> References: <20070619140038.GA13629@2ka.mipt.ru> <1182270529.4968.73.camel@localhost> <18040.5105.715624.286924@robur.slu.se> <20070619.152801.99185860.davem@davemloft.net> <1182441257.5017.48.camel@localhost> <1182442099.5017.51.camel@localhost> <20070621165546.GH15814@kvack.org> <1182790794.5184.41.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: David Miller , Robert.Olsson@data.slu.se, johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru, krkumar2@in.ibm.com, gaagaan@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, rick.jones2@hp.com, sri@us.ibm.com To: jamal Return-path: Received: from kanga.kvack.org ([66.96.29.28]:33413 "EHLO kanga.kvack.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750870AbXFYRIT (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Jun 2007 13:08:19 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1182790794.5184.41.camel@localhost> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 12:59:54PM -0400, jamal wrote: > On Thu, 2007-21-06 at 12:55 -0400, Benjamin LaHaise wrote: > > > You should qualify that as 'Old P4 Xeon', as the Core 2 Xeons are leagues > > better. > > The Xeon hardware is not that old - about a year or so (and so is the > opteron). > BTW, how could you tell this was old Xeon? CPUID: vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 15 model : 4 model name : Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 2.80GHz shows that it is a P4 Xeon, which sucks compared to: vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 6 model : 15 model name : Genuine Intel(R) CPU @ 2.66GHz which is a Core 2 based Xeon. The tuning required by the P4 is quite different than the Core 2, and it generally performs more poorly due to the length of the pipeline and the expense of pipeline flushes. -ben -- "Time is of no importance, Mr. President, only life is important." Don't Email: .