Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!sdd.hp.com!mips!prls!pyramid!ctnews!unix386!markb
From: markb@unix386.Convergent.COM (Mark Beyer)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: Unix on 486 Machines
Message-ID: <7790@unix386.Convergent.COM>
Date: 12 Jun 91 20:23:39 GMT
References: <9106110417.AA06408@w20-575-117.MIT.EDU> <1991Jun12.002349.19724@eng.umd.edu>
Organization: Unisys
Lines: 30

tgoose@eng.umd.edu (Jason Garms) writes:

>There are two major differences in running UNIX on an ISA and an EISA
>bus.   ...

>The second thing is that EISA boards provides significantly better performance
>in a network than ISA machines. 

You may be right, but it might be useful if you gave some detail as to why
EISA network adapters would be better.  The potential reasons I see are:

	1) EISA has a better bus mastering scheme.
	2) The data path is wider.
	3) The data rate can be higher.

But, then you'd have to support these reasons with measurements or more detailed
models.  For example, I'd like to know how many commercial protocol stacks for 
486 machines are capable of maxing out the ethernet with an EISA interface.
If your TCP stack just can't pump data down to the bus adapter
fast enough or, more likely, it can't receive it fast enough, maybe you're
OK with the (cheaper ?) ISA interface.

Any hard data ?

Regards,
Mark
-- 
Mark Beyer
markb@convergent.com
{uunet,sun,decwrl,hplabs}!pyramid!ctnews!markb