On 04/06/07, Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 08:54:50PM +0100, Chris wrote:
On 04/06/07, Colin Percival [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Old 2 PIII @600Mhz 768K26M/sec4.11-stable/SMP
50-60 min
New Pent D (2 core)@3.2GHz
On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 11:06:52PM +0100, Chris wrote:
On 04/06/07, Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 08:54:50PM +0100, Chris wrote:
On 04/06/07, Colin Percival [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Old 2 PIII @600Mhz 768K26M/sec
In the course of trying to work through some problems with a new MOBO,
I did some speed test which I found sort of surprising:
Old System
--
Dual PIII 600Mhz w/768K Mem and Mylex RAID 5 with old 9G SCSI drived
FBSD 4.11-Stable
Writing a 1G file to /dev/null with dd reports about
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 12:54:18PM -0500, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
In the course of trying to work through some problems with a new MOBO,
I did some speed test which I found sort of surprising:
Old System
--
Dual PIII 600Mhz w/768K Mem and Mylex RAID 5 with old 9G SCSI drived
FBSD
Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Old 2 PIII @600Mhz 768K26M/sec4.11-stable/SMP
50-60 min
New Pent D (2 core)@3.2GHz 2G 50M/sec6.2-stable/SMP
40-50 min
Fast 2 Xeon @3GHz 3G130M/sec4.11-stable/SMP
8 min
Is the difference in speed
Kris Kennaway wrote:
SNIP
This comparison is 100% bogus.
4.11 and 6.2 are vastly different (the latter builds all sorts of
different code, and uses a *different compiler* that is slower in
compiling the code). When trying to compare something, you have to
compare the *same* thing, or it's
Colin Percival wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Old 2 PIII @600Mhz 768K26M/sec4.11-stable/SMP
50-60 min
New Pent D (2 core)@3.2GHz 2G 50M/sec6.2-stable/SMP
40-50 min
Fast 2 Xeon @3GHz 3G130M/sec4.11-stable/SMP
8 min
Is the difference
On 04/06/07, Colin Percival [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Old 2 PIII @600Mhz 768K26M/sec4.11-stable/SMP
50-60 min
New Pent D (2 core)@3.2GHz 2G 50M/sec6.2-stable/SMP
40-50 min
Fast 2 Xeon @3GHz 3G130M/sec4.11-stable/SMP
8
Chris wrote:
On 04/06/07, Colin Percival [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Old 2 PIII @600Mhz 768K26M/sec4.11-stable/SMP
50-60 min
New Pent D (2 core)@3.2GHz 2G 50M/sec6.2-stable/SMP
40-50 min
Fast 2 Xeon @3GHz 3G130M/sec
On 6/4/07, Tim Daneliuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Chris wrote:
On 04/06/07, Colin Percival [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Old 2 PIII @600Mhz 768K26M/sec4.11-stable/SMP
50-60 min
New Pent D (2 core)@3.2GHz 2G 50M/sec6.2-stable/SMP
40-50 min
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 08:54:50PM +0100, Chris wrote:
On 04/06/07, Colin Percival [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Old 2 PIII @600Mhz 768K26M/sec4.11-stable/SMP
50-60 min
New Pent D (2 core)@3.2GHz 2G 50M/sec6.2-stable/SMP
40-50 min
Fast 2
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 08:54:50PM +0100, Chris wrote:
On 04/06/07, Colin Percival [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
both of these have been confirmed numerous times by different people
so sweeping them under the carpet and saying they simply not true
would be wrong.
My
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 06:07:31PM -0500, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 08:54:50PM +0100, Chris wrote:
On 04/06/07, Colin Percival [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
both of these have been confirmed numerous times by different people
so sweeping them under the
Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Chris wrote:
On 04/06/07, Colin Percival [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Old 2 PIII @600Mhz 768K26M/sec4.11-stable/SMP
50-60 min
New Pent D (2 core)@3.2GHz 2G 50M/sec6.2-stable/SMP
40-50 min
Fast 2 Xeon @3GHz 3G
Garrett Cooper wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote:
It will be of academic interest to me to see how people respond to this.
Unfortunately - as documented in my original post - the 4.11 CD will
not even boot on this new motherboard for some reason. Given that, and
that 4.x is no longer actively
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 10:37:02PM -0500, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Maybe I'm just getting old ;)
I think that goes without saying. We're *all* getting old, at exactly
the same rate.
Some of us got a head start, though.
--
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
Thomas McCauley:
16 matches
Mail list logo