On Sun, 2011-03-13 at 17:47 +0100, Cesare Leonardi wrote:
> On 13/03/2011 04:45, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > This really ought to be checked on a Pentium M as well, though.
>
> Ok, my notebook uses a Pentium M 725 (Dothan).
I think that one actually has PAE. /proc/cpuinfo will tell you for
sure.
> I've run the following script (it should be equivalent to yours) with
> 2.6.38-rc7 from experimental in recovery mode, both for 486 and 686.
> Attached you can find the results.
>
> #!/bin/bash
> for i in {1..3}; do
> netperf -H 192.168.10.1,4 -t TCP_STREAM -l 60
> netperf -H 192.168.10.1,4 -t UDP_RR -l 60
> done
>
> The differences between 486 and 686 look very small, if not null.
> If you want me to do some more tests, i'm available.
You seem to have tested the loopback device - which has quite different
performance from real networking!
Actually my previous (not completely working) laptop has some kind of
Pentium M so I could do this testing myself.
> I've seen in the beginning of this thread you've reported the result of
> a scripts elaborated by a program called ministat. I admit i've not
> understood well neither the results nor the procedure. If you want me to
> do that as well, please, explain a bit more the procedure.
> Otherwise we can try to use some benchmark tools (no experience in this
> field). I've seen that Phoronix is in Debian since few days.
Put two sets of benchmark results in two files (one number per line).
ministat then calculates statistical measures of each set and a
comparison of the two sets.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Once a job is fouled up, anything done to improve it makes it worse.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part