Thanks to all !
The error seems to be done solved.

roberto

2006/10/13, Matthias Scheler <tron@zhadum.org.uk>:
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 12:27:04PM -0400, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 03:51:39PM +0100, Matthias Scheler wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 03:56:57PM +0200, Christian Biere wrote:
> > > > He claims certain models are, not RealTek in general.
> > >
> > > The "evil cards" are the ones which are driven by rtk(4) like the one
> > > mentioned here. In my opinion cards driven by re(4) aren't much better.
> > > They are considerably slower than other Gigabit ethernet cards and
> > > require more CPU power.
> >
> > Why do you believe this to be the case?  The chips driven by re(4) have
> > checksum and segmentation offload and a reasonably sane DMA descriptor
> > format.  I don't see anything about their design that suggests that they
> > should inherently be slower nor require more CPU power than other gigabit
> > parts.
>
> A comprehensive test of PCI Gigabit ethernet cards in a good computer
> magazine. They've run various benchmarks (in a 32Bit/33MHz motherboard)
> which suggested that the Intel cards are the fastest. The RealTek card
> were the slowest causing the most CPU load (under Windows XP and Linux).
> The magazine therefore recommented to buy either the Intel cards or
> Marvell chipsets based cards depending on much money you want to spend.
>
>         Kind regards
>
> --
> Matthias Scheler                                  http://zhadum.org.uk/
>


-- 
Ing. Roberto Pereyra
ContenidosOnline
Looking for Linux Virtual Private Servers ? Click here:
http://www.spry.com/hosting-affiliate/scripts/t.php?a_aid=426&a_bid=56