Classic Mac Hardware (Troubleshooting, Upgrading, & Modifying) > General Hardware Discussions

speed of common technologies

<< < (4/4)


--- Quote from: chrisNova777 on December 23, 2014, 06:30:38 AM ---I think fw400 could present a faster handshaking + initiation of the transfers... and this is where it makes up the extra speed!

--- End quote ---

Could see it depending on chipset and driver design/efficiency for chipset of the nic.  Way back in the day I remember when generic realtek 8139 driver was released for pre-x mac os versions (pre-x for that matter).. Driver was horrible compared to win/lin version.

Not advertising/selling, but think the guy on ebay still has a bunch of usb 2.0  fw400/800 enclosures for $12 (approx.) each if anyone is interested I will post link or pm and I can send. They did work well on the fw400/800 (at 400) ports under os 9 on my MDD.  Haven't had a chance to flat out benchmark from Mac perspective the onboard gb nic but got to view stats a bit from my server.

so on my own personal network i get 40MB/s consistantly to my fileserver..
but it spikes up + above that sometimes i see speeds up to 80MB/s

it would be amazing to consistantly get 80MB-100MB/s on gigabit ethernet..
while the speed is listed here as 125MB/s thats a theoretical max..

i wish it was my real world speed tho;)

firewire 400 + gigabit ethernet seems to be about the same speed for me
at least the speeds that i manage to get..

maybe if i was copying from SSD->SSD then id get 80MB/s speeds..

whats everyone elses top speed (consistant) for gigabit ethernet?

100BASE-T is 100Mb/s not 12.5 maybe you were thinking MB/s? I see how you seem to be trying to measure everything in BYTES but people typically measure gigabit and 100 megabit in bits as its easier to keep track of and more people recognize it. This is also because internet companies sell plans based on bits and not bytes because it looks like they are giving you 8x more to the normal untrained eye :P

I myself personally have actually had a record of 1.2Gb/s on gigabit internet (short amount of time) and can easily average at 800Mb/s. This speed is highly influenced by everything including all of your network equipment (routers, Ethernet card, switches)  to your cable companies equipment, and then all the hops to get to whatever web server you are going to never mind the hard drive of the computer your connecting to has to be able to read at 80MBs+ and not all old hard drives can do this. (I do have raid-0 SSDs so this is probably why I got such high speeds)

AGP is considerably different from PCI on systems. PCI bus is different from the AGP graphics bus. AGP bus connected directly to Northbridge while pci bus is on the southbridge. Furthermore they have their own bandwidths. You can saturate the PCI bus and still not be using all of the AGP bus. The pci-x bus enhances the PCI bus and uses 4 times the clock speed but is very similar to the regular PCI bus and was developed to replace the already slow bus. The AGP bus connects directly to the northbridge of a system to help with speed and it can directly interact with system ram using GART unlike PCI bus where a pci graphics card would have to copy system ram to its own ram instead of reading it directly. AGP is specifically designed for graphics cards and no other components can use it while PCI/PCI-X have other uses and are real buses (if you want to be technical AGP is NOT a bus it is just connecting two nodes only for use by graphics subsystems). To get further into this and become more technical the AGP bus has pipelining and sideband addressing, and AGP would not share bandwidth like PCI-X would. AGP also makes multiple requests for data while PCI makes only one request and doesn't make another until data is transferred. AGP uses transfers that are also 8 bytes in length while PCI uses 4 bytes.

Sorry for rambling on about that for a long time but the general idea is AGP is not the same as PCI-X or PCI.

bits vs bytes.. whats the difference? 1 vs 8

that means that 100MegaBITS per second really means
in actuality (real life use) it is divided by 8 = 12.5 megaBYTES per second


--- Quote from: Ozfer on April 21, 2015, 11:33:07 PM ---100BASE-T is 100Mb/s not 12.5 maybe you were thinking MB/s?

--- End quote ---

i did my research from google. googled it and got this:

--- Quote ---100 megabits (100baseT) has a theoretical speed of 12.5 megabytes per second but usually sustained transfers are about 3-4 megabytes per second.Oct 16, 2002
--- End quote ---

one of the biggest "os 9 take-aways" for anyone reading this thread should be that sata150 + gigabit ethernet vastly outperform firewire 800.


[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page

Go to full version