gige benchmark performance
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Robert G. Brown rgb at phy.duke.eduSat Mar 16 11:12:03 PST 2002
- Previous message: gige benchmark performance
- Next message: Miniature Beowulf
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Mark Hartner wrote: > > also, the latency numbers seemed rather strange to me - > > am I understanding the graph correctly, that your eepro100 > > was showing something like 500 us latency? and that all > > Yes, 541us to be exact. > > > the cards were well above 100 us? that seems quite high, > > though I'm comparing to a home-made udp-based ping/echo server. > > Around 120us for both the Intel Pro1000T and Netgear GA620. > > > Those are the times it takes to transfer 1byte using TCP/IP with Netpipe. > > Are there better ways to measure latency? Look at lmbench (www.bitmover.com). It has tools to measure "everything". Although I don't think you'll get a terribly different latency answer from netpipe and lmbench. Indeed, if you do a netpipe sweep of packet sizes, you should see linear growth in bandwidth throughout the latency dominated region where the slope of the bandwidth/packet size curve is the number of packets/second. This gives you a much better "feel" for the impact of latency at various message sizes than does an isolated single packet measurement. rgb -- Robert G. Brown http://www.phy.duke.edu/~rgb/ Duke University Dept. of Physics, Box 90305 Durham, N.C. 27708-0305 Phone: 1-919-660-2567 Fax: 919-660-2525 email:rgb at phy.duke.edu
- Previous message: gige benchmark performance
- Next message: Miniature Beowulf
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
