more RAM + faster disk -> slower box?!
mark at blackmans.org
Thu Nov 29 14:52:48 GMT 2001
You're right, I didn't pay attention to the actual chipset. I still
favour the cache problem myself, since the disks aren't busy. Anyway,
I'm sure Ian will report back.
We had a lot of problems with Intel 440BXes at work I seem to recall, but it
was simple failure rather than being overworked.
> On Thursday 29 November 2001 2:19 pm, Mark Blackman wrote:
> > http://www.pcguide.com/ref/mbsys/cache/charCacheability-c.html
> > Seems to be connected with the Intel 430HX chipset.
> > This seems far more likely.
> His dmesg output suggests a Celeron on a 440BX (oooo... FSB tweaking! Yum!)
> chipset, and I haven't heard of similar problems with that config in this
> manner. This article would suggest that if you had 64Mb RAM and then upgraded
> above that, THEN you could expect a performce drop (which would suggest the
> majority of us are running our machines with the performance drop already
> there), unless you were using 430HX in which case the barrier is 512Mb. I
> still think it's a disk issue. Maybe. :-)
> Paul Robinson
> ------ FreeBSD UK Users' Group - Mailing List ------
More information about the Ukfreebsd