Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.misc:4194 alt.folklore.computers:68208 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!aggedor.rmit.EDU.AU!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.mathworks.com!uhog.mit.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!darwin.sura.net!wvnvms!marshall.wvnet.edu!marshall.edu!copley1 Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc,alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: BSD sluggish compared to Linux? Message-ID: <1994Nov21.141514@hobbit> From: copley1@marshall.edu (Ronald Copley) Date: 21 Nov 94 14:15:14 EDT References: <3am248$7kv@itu1.sun.ac.za> <3am2s0$7nl@pdq.coe.montana.edu> <3amia8$iiv@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> Organization: Marshall University Nntp-Posting-Host: frodo.marshall.edu Lines: 25 > But, to confuse matters, I installed NetBSD 1.0 on a machine that was > using the same MB and processor as the Linux box [486DX2/50] but with > only 500 Meg of disk and 8 Meg or RAM. BSD seemed to crawl on this > box, even compared to my 486SX/25. I blew away the BSD installation, > re-installed DOS and Windows, and noticed that the machine was STILL > crawling. The problem: no L2 cache on that machine as opposed to > 64K L2 cache on the 486SX... And it made a BIG difference. > It can be utterly amazing as to what effect even the smallest amount of L2 cache can have. I specified 128KB L2 when I bought my 486DX-50 many years ago and, although it was expensive (at the time), it has definately paid for itself. -- Informatiks | Ronald Copley, owner | Buying and selling small to medium 1010 Township RD 78W | quantities of used Pyramid, Sun, Scottown OH 45678-9051 | DEC (PDPs) and Data General computer +1.614.643.1340 | equipment. Trades welcome!! (evenings, please) | --