Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!jarthur!usc!ucsd!nosc!crash!pnet01!jca
From: jca@pnet01.cts.com (John C. Archambeau)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Speed costs (Re: MWC's Coherent - A Lemon...)
Message-ID: <2806@crash.cts.com>
Date: 25 May 90 03:16:05 GMT
Sender: root@crash.cts.com
Organization: People-Net [pnet01], El Cajon CA
Lines: 29

wjr@ftp.COM (Bill Rust) writes:
>In article <265612f1-1c4c.4comp.sys.ibm.pc-1@vpnet.chi.il.us> kji@vpnet.chi.il.us (Ken Isacson) writes:
>
>>You will find, as my studies have proven, that Arcnet degrades very quickly
>>with heavy usage, but Ethernet provides a more constant network solution.
>>Sure Ethernet is not as fast as Arcnet, but with a large work group,
>                  ^^^
>It is my understanding that Arcnet runs at 250Kb while Ethernet runs
>at 10Mb. We regularly have file transfers run at 3Mb on unloaded nets
>between PCs. I don't think that Arcnet will perform anywhere near that
>fast. 
>
>>Ethernet is *THE* champ when compared with Arcnet.

Depends on the arcnet card.  Arcnet cards currently come in 1, 2, and 4 Mbit
per second speeds.  I know that a 20 Mbit per second arcnet card is being
developed now as we speak by SMC and the other major arcnet card
manufacturers.
 
     // JCA

 /*
 **--------------------------------------------------------------------------*
 ** Flames  : /dev/null                     | Small memory model only for
 ** ARPANET : crash!pnet01!jca@nosc.mil     | Unix?  Get the (*bleep*) out
 ** INTERNET: jca@pnet01.cts.com            | of here!
 ** UUCP    : {nosc ucsd hplabs!hd-sdd}!crash!pnet01!jca
 **--------------------------------------------------------------------------*
 */