Which is better Gigabit Ethernet DP or Quicksilver SP

Hello
I'm fairly new to the Mac only been a user for 2.5 years, versus Wintel 20 years.
Well a brief history I started out with a iMac G3 600MHz/1GB/40GB/CD-RW/16MB Rage 128 in April 2008 then moved onto a PowerMac G4 Quicksilver 2001 733MHz last September its mostly stock except upgraded to Tiger 10.4.11, maxed RAM to 1.5GB, added Pioneer DVR109 SuperDrive, & had to downgrade processor due to daughter-card failure its now got a Digital Audio's 466MHz Clock/133 MHz Bus/512K L2 Backside Cache CPU.
But anyways just got given a PowerMac G4 Gigabit Ethernet Dual Processor 450 MHz/2GB RAM/Pioneer SuperDrive/Rage 128 16MB tower so my questions are.
Which would be better the QS or the GE? any advice &/or opinions would be greatly appreciated, thanks in advance.
Also can I install the QS's AGP 4X Geforce MX2 32MB video card into the GE's AGP 2X slot?
I realize by CPU the GE beats out the QS by leaps & bounds., But the QS has both 133 MHz RAM & Bus versus the GE 100 MHz RAM & Bus, the QS also has a AGP 4X slot instead of the GE's AGP 2X slot, but the GE also can have 2GB RAM too instead of the QS's 1.5GB.
Yours Truly: A fellow Mac Head
PS Have a good evening, take care.

Hi SLCUTUSA, and a warm welcome to the forums & belated Macdom!
Difficult call you have there, the QS is faster, the DA more indestructible.
Depending which 733 it is, (one was a real dog), the DP/450 may be faster too.

Similar Messages

  • Gigabit Ethernet distribution system ports

    Hi,
         we are using Cisco WLAN controller 5508 which have 8 Gigabit Ethernet distribution system ports. Can any one tell me how to check the model number of the gigabit Ethernet distribution system ports.
    Regards,
    Noman

    Noman,
    I’m still a little confused, sorry. Are you looking for the model of the installed SFP transceiver module or the part number of the SFP port bank itself?
    Are you looking for this:
    Or this:
    If you want to know the transceiver module, you can look at the show port summary command. It will tell you what type of transceiver you have in there, although it won't list the exact make/model but you can figure it out. 1000BaseTX = GLC-T. 1000BaseSX = GLC-SX-MM. 1000BaseLX = GLC-LH-SM.
    If you want to know the part number for the SFP bus, ports or chips themselves, then I'm at a loss for you. I guess you can take the controller apart and do a visual inspection to see if you find anything useful. Are you trying to DIY repair a dead controller or something?
    Justin

  • Which is better, Netgear N900 or Airport Extreme?

    Which is better, Netgear N900 or Airport Extreme?

    Gpcn,
    I'm going to highly recommend the new Airport Extreme. I've been having all sorts of wifi and networking issues because of the saturated 2.4 GHz spectrum in my surrounding neighborhood.
    I finally bit the bullet on friday night and purchased the Airport Extreme. I could not be happier!
    I used to top out at around 8 Mbit/s download and 1 Mbit/s upload with my older Linksys setup. Now i'm getting 40+ Mbit/s and 2 Mbit/s respectively.
    Not only that, but i'm no longer dropping my wifi with my devices (latops, iPads, iPhone, etc). It's very consistent and the speeds are amazing!
    Sure it may be pricier than others, but it's worth every penny. The setup is very easy and you get Three Gigabit Ethernet LAN ports for connecting computers or network devices as well as built-in NAT support for security. You are better off getting the Airport Extreme.

  • Thunderbolt to Gigabit Ethernet reconnect slow after sleep

    Hello, guys.
    I couldn't get the management of where I work to give me a working WiFi (they offered an insecure, unprotected WiFi... madness), so I had to opt for Gigabit Ethernet. I bought the Apple Thunderbolt to Gigabit Ethernet adapter for my 2012 rMBP on OSX 10.8.5. All software is updated via the App Store.
    The adapter is working fine for the most part, but there is something that I find bothering: when the computer wakes up the adapter takes something like 30 seconds to achieve a working Internet connection, which is a pain. It's an issue I've never experienced in any other computer or setup, either wired or wireless, and it makes little sense (if WiFi is able to reconnect instantaneously, why can't this adapter?)
    I don't know if it's a side issue of the adapter having to boot, the need for refreshing the IP address through DHCP or whatever, but it's something that I'd rather find a solution to. Of course, it feels like a first world problem (it certainly ain't critical) but if there is a known workarround I'd like to know.
    Thanks.

    It's not really your computer that is getting the 2Gbps download - it is the router/ modem.
    If you hooked better/ different hardware up you could probably push those speeds around your network too. The trouble is that most residential hardware is gigabit ethernet not fibre. Fibre cards & cable are expensive in comparison.
    The existing hardware may allow you to 'bond or aggregate' multiple ethernet connections into one link to get more speed over ethernet. Obviously this requires more complex routers, switches & a network admin to set it up
    Those speeds sound nice, this bottleneck will mean that other devices on you network can't choke up the whole connection & make other users sad.

  • Which is better, Kindle Plugin or Calibre?

    I am wanting to create a kindle friendly file of the book I am working on. I know that Amazon released a Kindle Plugin for ID but I have read that there are various issues that it has because it is free and a beta version. Anyway, for those of you who have converted epub to mobi (using Calibre) and the Kindle Plugin. Which is better?
    Thanks!

    Gpcn,
    I'm going to highly recommend the new Airport Extreme. I've been having all sorts of wifi and networking issues because of the saturated 2.4 GHz spectrum in my surrounding neighborhood.
    I finally bit the bullet on friday night and purchased the Airport Extreme. I could not be happier!
    I used to top out at around 8 Mbit/s download and 1 Mbit/s upload with my older Linksys setup. Now i'm getting 40+ Mbit/s and 2 Mbit/s respectively.
    Not only that, but i'm no longer dropping my wifi with my devices (latops, iPads, iPhone, etc). It's very consistent and the speeds are amazing!
    Sure it may be pricier than others, but it's worth every penny. The setup is very easy and you get Three Gigabit Ethernet LAN ports for connecting computers or network devices as well as built-in NAT support for security. You are better off getting the Airport Extreme.

  • How do I maximize LAN speeds using Gigabit Ethernet, jumbo frames?

    I move a lot of large files (RAW photos, music and video) around my internal network, and I'm trying to squeeze out the fastest transfer speeds possible. My question has to do both with decisions about hardware and what settings to use once it's all hooked up.
    This is what I have so far:
    -- imac 3.06GHz, macbook pro 2.53GHz
    -- Cisco gigabit smart switch capable of jumbo frames
    -- Buffalo Terastation Duo NAS (network attached storage), also capable of Gbit and jumbo frames
    -- All wired up with either cat6 or cat53e.
    -- The sizes of the files I'm moving would include large #s of files at either 15MB (photos), 7MB (music), 1-2GB (video) and 650MB (also video).
    -- jumbo frames have been enabled in the settings of the macs, the switch and the buffalo HD.
    -- I've played with various settings of simultaneous connections (more of a help with smaller files), no real difference
    -- Network utility shows the ethernet set to Gbit, with no errors or collisions.
    -- have tried both ftp and the finder's drap and drop
    -- also, whenever I'm doing a major move of data, I kick my family off the network, so there is no other traffic that should be interfering.
    Even with all that, I'm still lucky to get transfer speeds at 15-20mbps, but more commonly at around 10. The other odd thing I've encountered while trying to up my speeds, is that I might start out a transfer at maybe 60mbps, it will maintain that for about 30-60sec and then it appears to ramp itself down, sometimes to as low as 1-5mbps. I'm starting to think my network is mocking me
    I also have a dual band (2.4/5) wireless n router (not jumbo frame capable), but I'm assuming wired is going to trump wireless? (NOTE: in my tests, I have disabled wireless to force the connection through the ethernet).
    Can anyone help with suggestions, and/or suggest a strong networking reference book with emphasis on mac? I'm willing to invest in additional equipment within reason.
    Thanks in advance!
    juliana

    I'm going to pick and choose to answer just a few of the items you have listed. Hopefully others will address other items.
    • This setup was getting me speeds as high as 10-15MB/sec, and as low as 5-6MB/sec when I was transferring video files around 1-2 GB in size
    I would think a single large file would get the best sustained transfer rates, as you have less create new file overhead on the destination device. It is disturbing that the large files transfer at a slower rate.
    • Would a RAID0 config get me faster write speeds than RAID1? I have another NAS that can do other RAID configs, which is fastest as far as write times?
    RAID0 (Striped) is generally faster, as the I/O is spread across 2 disks.
    RAID1 is mirrored, so you can not free the buffer until the same data is on BOTH disks. The disks are NOT going to be in rotational sync, so at least one of the disks will have to wait longer for the write sectors to move under the write heads.
    But RAID1 gives you redundency. RAID0 has not redundency. And you can NOT switch back and forth between the 2 without reformatting your disks, so if you choose RAID0, you do not get redundency unless you provide your own via a backup device for your NAS.
    • what is the most efficient transfer protocol? ftp? smb? something else? And am I better off invoking the protocol from the terminal, or is the overhead of an app-based client negligible?
    Test the different transfers using a large file (100's of MB or a GB sized file would be good as a test file).
    I've had good file transfers with AFP file sharing, but not knowing anything about your NAS, I do not know if it supports AFP, and if it does, whether it is a good implementation.
    If your NAS supports ssh, then I would try scp instead of ftp. scp is like using cp only it works over the network.
    If your NAS support rsync, that would be even better, as it has the ability to just copy files that are either NOT on the destination or update files which have changed, but leave the matching files alone.
    This would help in situations where you cannot copy everything all at once.
    But no matter what you choose, you should measure your performance so you choose something that is good enough.
    • If a client is fine, does anyone have a suggestion as to best one for speed? Doesn't have to be free -- I don't mind supporting good software.
    Again just test what you have.
    • Whats a good number to allow for simultaneous connections, given the number of files and their size?
    If the bottleneck is the NAS, then adding more I/O that will force the disk heads to move away from the current file being written will just slow things down.
    But try 2 connections and measure your performance. If it gets better, then maybe the NAS is not the bottleneck.
    • What question am I not asking?
    You should try using another system as a test destination device in the network setup to see if it gets better, worse, or the same throughput as the NAS. You need to see about changing things in your setup to isolate where the problem might be.
    Also do not rule out bad ethernet cables, so switch them out as well. For example, there was a time I tried to use Gigabit ethernet, but could only get 100BaseT. I even purchased a new gigabit switch, thinking the 1st was just not up to the task. It turned out I had a cheap ethernet cable that only had 4 wires instead of 8 and was not capable of gigabit speeds. An ethernet cable that has a broken wire or connector could exhibit similar performance issues.
    So change anything and everything in your setup, one item at a time and use the same test so you have a pear to pear comparision.

  • Mac Gigabit Ethernet Cards Network Performance

    I now have a 1.8ghz CoreDuo MacMini and 2.0ghz MacBook and both have gigabit Ethernet cards in them, based on the Marvell Yukon chipset i believe.
    I was wondering upto what speeds people have driven these ethernet cards?
    I'm doing some testing using iperf version 2.0.4 but I can't seem to get any more than around 30MB/sec out of the cards.
    Is this their limit? Have you managed to get better out of them? If so, how?
    Synology have just brought out a NAS box (DS209), that reads and writes at around 60MB/sec, but pretty pointless unless your ethernet card is upto the same speeds.

    If your notation is technically correct, you are saying you are getting 30 megabytes per second as your tested speed. That would translate to 240 megabits per second, which is above the old 100 megabits per second limitation. If this is all accurate, then the next question is what cabling and other equipment are you using to connect the two? If the cabling is not Cat6 (category 6) you may not be able to achieve optimal transfer speeds. If you are using a hub, switch, or router which is not gigabit rated, you would have limitations there.

  • Transfer HDD from Gigabit Ethernet to MDD

    About to commence using 1.25DP FW800, which is runner Jaguar. Is it possible just to remove the hard drive from my CPU upgraded Gigabit Ethernet running X.5.2 and install in the MDD, or is it better to do an erase and install and again go through broadband setup, applications etc etc?
    Thanks in advance.

    Because you are going from G4 to G4, it may work without a problem. The only problem may occur from system profiling and hardware preference conflicts.
    You can give it a try (the meaning behind my advice), just may not be the preferred method.
    If it doesn't work out, go to plan "B"......
    Install the hard drive, and in the first startup, reset the PRAM (holding commandoption+PR while starting, hold until the second startup chime). Release the keys, and (if the old drive is still in the MDD) immediately press option key to open the Startup manager. Select the "new" old GE OS and click the right arrow.
    See how you fare....

  • Combo USB 2.0 + Gigabit Ethernet PCI Card?

    I have been looking feverishly for a manufacturer that makes a Mac-compatible PCI Card that has both USB 2.0 and Gigabit Ethernet on the same card. So far I have not been able to find anything. I am wondering if anyone knows of one that will be compatible with a B&W Powermac with a gig of RAM and a Sonnet G4 500Mhz processor.
    On a side note, I know this Mac has limitations pertaining to Hard Drive size and I am curious: If I have a slave drive enabled, is my total combined usable size the 128 limit or can I have 2 120 gig Hard drives? And what is the highest speed drive recommended for the B&W's slow bus?
    Kind of a lot of questions... Thanks so much in advance!!!!
    -Kurt

    I don't know of a Mac-compatible combo card like that. Because of the issues with USB 2.0 cards in Macs, you'll have better compatibility installing one that has an NEC controller chip. This stipulation would narrow the field of recommended combo cards even further, if there were any from which to choose. As for hard drive capacity, the 128 GB limitation applies to each drive - not the sum of two drives, configured as master and slave. If your B&W G3 has a Rev. 1 motherboard, the onboard IDE controller doesn't support master/slave configurations (see "New Features" Section 3 - "Revised IDE Controller Chip" on this page). Depending on the amount of money you wish to invest in your B&W, this Acard AEC-6280M ATA-133 controller card would enable you to take advantage of reasonably-priced, larger capacity drives. About six months ago, I bought a pair of sale-priced Seagate 120 GB drives for $59.99 USD each, when that capacity was being phased out by the retailer. Now, you can often find larger capacity drives for less than that. As for bus speed, an ATA-100 or ATA-133 drive is backward-compatible and will run on the slower, onboard IDE bus in the B&W. The spindle speed for most drives is 7200 RPM, which provides a slight improvement over the slower 5400 RPM drives.

  • What's the maximum LAN speed with the Thunderbolt to Gigabit Ethernet Adapter on my MacBook Pro?

    While I was at Yodobashi Camera yesterday, I got a Thunderbolt to Gigabit ethernet adapter for my MacBook Pro. I figure, since I'm paying for the high speed fiber optic (Sony Nuro), why limit my self to wi-fi speeds at home?
    Before connecting the adapter, via wi-fi it the speed was 143.8 Mbps down and 181.5 Mbps up.
    After connecting the adapter and making a direct LAN connection to the router, the speed is 783.2 Mbps down and 940.1 Mbps up.
    I'm certainly happy with the speed, but since Sony Nuro is supposed to be 2 Gbps down and 1 Gbps up I was wondering what the maximum possible is with this computer and adapter. Before asking the provider I was curious what the maximum specs where.
    The ether cable is a 3 m category 6.
    Thanks,
    doug

    It's not really your computer that is getting the 2Gbps download - it is the router/ modem.
    If you hooked better/ different hardware up you could probably push those speeds around your network too. The trouble is that most residential hardware is gigabit ethernet not fibre. Fibre cards & cable are expensive in comparison.
    The existing hardware may allow you to 'bond or aggregate' multiple ethernet connections into one link to get more speed over ethernet. Obviously this requires more complex routers, switches & a network admin to set it up
    Those speeds sound nice, this bottleneck will mean that other devices on you network can't choke up the whole connection & make other users sad.

  • Gigabit ethernet + TC doesn't mean gigabit transfer rates to the TC drive..

    Alright.... I've spent a ton of time trying to figure this out (probably more than I should have) and I thought I'd post my findings so that either a) I'll save someone else time out there or b) someone can tell me I'm a complete moron
    So I had an airport extreme. I replaced it with a Time Capsule. I have a Windows (boooo) PC connecting directly to my TC using a gigabit ethernet card (which I bought specifically connect it to the TC) so (I thought) I could enjoy gigabit transfer speeds to the internal hard drive from the wired PC. I had some fun plans of shoving my itunes directory on the TC and letting appletv sync (yes through my pc) and keeping lots of videos there, etc. Who cares - it'd be at gigabit speeds! But, in reality, things didn't quite work that way (though my itunes directory does still live on my TC...for now).
    Well, I had a semi-unique situation to do some pretty massive testing because I have 2 gigabit network cards, 1 100mb network card, and a wireless-n network card and two internal hard drives - both very fast. I also tried Cat 5, Cat 5e, and a Cat 6 cable.
    And here's what I (think I) figured out:
    The hard drive in TC can not achieve gigabit transfer speeds. Your transfer rates will be limited by the IO to the hard drive. In fact, it can't even come close.
    Using my "fastest" setup - so Cat 6, fastest internal drive, gigabit ethernet, and transferring a file exactly 1 gig in size I was able to have a sustained transfer rate of 140 megabit per second - that's 17.4 MB/s for folks not wanting to do the math (that's reading FROM the TC. Writing TO the TC dropped the speed down to 106 megabit/second or 13.35 MB/s). Going to a 5e cable knocked that down to 130 megabit a second. Putting in a Cat 5 cable knocked me down to 110 megabit a second. Switching between my two gigabit network cards did nothing. Switching my cards between two computers did nothing.
    Now, just changing the above setup to use my 100Mb network card resulted in these results: 67 megabit read (8.4MB/s) and 65 megabit write (8MB/s)...
    And using wireless N, I got about 10MB/s up and down.
    And just as a final test, connecting my two computers together using the 2 gigabit network cards through the TC, I was able to achieve standard gigabit speeds.
    SO what does this all mean?
    I think the IO to the hard drive in the TC can only read at about 140 megabit/s and write at about 110 megabit/s. I'm not sure if it's the HD itself or how it's connecting to the TC - but that's why I'm not aware of anyone getting faster transfer rates to the drive in the TC (maybe you guys are?). The gigabit ports themselves are fine - and if you're doing anything from one gigabit port to another gigabit port you'll be fine.
    So stop beating yourself up trying to find some elusive XP specific issue with gigabit transfer rates (though vista had a problem - shocker), or that you must have a defective gigabit card (which is why I have two cards now instead of one :)), or that your cable must be bad ("maybe my cat 5e isn't good enough?")... it's just this drive ... or how the drive is connecting to the network - can't handle the gigabit speeds.
    Unless someone else out there has another explanation? Do these speeds mesh with what you're seeing in "optimal" situations? Or maybe there's just a throttle switch for goobers like me using Windows instead of MacOS!

    Hi,
    the interfaces available today which connect your drives integrated electronics to your computer can handle that speeds. but the drive itself is limited by the mechanical things going on in there
    You can get such transfer speeds if the data you request is in the cache of the drives internal electronics for example. Some drives have 8 MB of cache memory. So if you request to read or write less than 8 mb and (in the read case) you are lucky enough to have those few megabytes cached then you may get that performance
    Regards,
    somi

  • How big of a hardrive can i use in my gigabit ethernet g4 dual 500.

    Hi there.
    I wanted to now how big of a hard drive can i use in my gigabit ethernet g4 powerpc with a dual 500 processor . at the present time i have one 80 and one 20 gig drive in there now.
    So my answer is how big of a drive can i use before i have problems with seting it up. Like i want to use a 500 gig drive in my computer and my old 80 gig too. i want to buy a apple tv and store my dvds on the big 500 hardrive so i have alot of room for the vidio files, for apple t.v . If i can use one as big as one terabite you now the real big one that would be fine. The more room i have the better for me. I will be able to watch the movies i downloaded from the internet and i wont have to burn them at all.
    This is of corse if apple tv will handle it.

    Hi-
    If you need that much storage, and you'll have to buy a controller anyhow, get a SATA controller card, and put one or two 500gb SATA drives in. The enterprise class of SATA drives are made especially for multi media storage, have excellent seek times and fast data transfer rates. A "bargain" on a package can be had at OWC:
    http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Other%20World%20Computing/SATAM500GPCI/
    or
    http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Other%20World%20Computing/SATAM10TBPCI/
    The MaxLine Pro drives have great characteristics, and are reviewed favorably.
    I have an OWC SATA card, and the card works perfectly, and is cheaper than other makers cards of equivalent specs.
    G4AGP(450)Sawtooth, 2ghz PowerLogix, 2gbRAM, 300gbSATA+160gb HD, ATI Radeon 9800   Mac OS X (10.4.8)   Pioneer DVR-109, LaCie 160gb, 23"Cinema Display, Ratoc USB2.0, Nikon Coolscan

  • Macbook Pro does not see Fast Ethernet but works fine with Gigabit Ethernet

    Hi to everybody,
      It is some time I have a problem connecting my unibody Macbook Pro (late 2008) to the ethernet cables in my office. There are 16 wall jacks in the lab, of which 13 are Fast Ethernet (100 Mbit/s) and 3 are Gigabit Ethernet. No matter what I do, if I connect to the 100 Mbit/s jacks, my Macbook does not see the connection and keeps saying "Cable unplugged". If I switch to a Gigabit jack, then a connection is quickly established.
    I have spent one whole afternoon debugging. Here is what I did:
    My computer dual boots Mac OS X and Linux. No matter which operating system I use, the problem is the same.
    Using different Cat.5 cables does not change the situation (I tried three of them.)
    All the 13 Fast Ethernet jacks do not work.
    All the 3 Gigabit jacks work smoothly.
    What puzzles me is that my computer happly uses the newest technology (Gigabit ethernet) but has problems with the oldest one. Has somebody else experienced the same problem?

    After a lot of struggle, I discovered that other people had this very issue as well. It seems that the cause is a faulty Realtek chip used in the ethernet cards of some MacBooks and other brands. There is apparently no way to fix this: I solved my problems by buying a Gigabit Ethernet switch which I connected to the Fast Ethernet wall jack. (Another option might be to use a Ethernet-to-USB adapter - but I did not try this as I have no adapter of this kind.)

  • ATI/Radeon 9800 Pro 128 AGP 4x/2x in Gigabit Ethernet dual 450 PMac G4

    Hi,
    This is my first time posting to these discussion group... I've been going through related threads and have not found an answer to my problem...
    I have a Gigabit Ethernet dual 450 G4. Awhile ago I upgraded the processor to a Sonnet 1.8ghz so I could run Leopard.
    I just bough the ATI/Radeon 9800 Pro 128 AGP 4x/2x video card. I researched around and that seemed to be a card that would work in my machine. I even read a review on Amazon where someone had also upgraded to the 1.8 processor used this card with no issues.
    I do have an older monitor - Apple Studio Display CRT with the ADC connector. So I also bought the Apple DVI to ADC adapter kit.
    I installed the card and do not get any picture at all - I believe I have installed everything correctly. I'm pretty sure I can hear the fan on the video card in the machine. The monitor is getting power from the adapter since the button lights up when I press it - but it does not stay lit -- the monitor never turns on. Using my old graphics card the monitor makes a little "beep" when it turns on.
    In reading the other topics I am wondering if it might be a power issue? According to Other World Computing's profile my machine has a max of 220 watts. Although they suggest this video card as one the will work in my machine.
    I have disabled the hard drive that came with the machine (too small) and am using two Maxtor hard drives that I added - one ATA (120gb) and one SATA (500gb) that is connected to an SATA pci card. I also have two additional pci cards with usb 2.0/firewire ports.
    In looking at the topics here I came across the link about taping the 3 and 11 pins on the video card. Even though the card I have is 4x/2x not 8x I thought I'd give it a shot. That did not work either.
    Any help you can give would be greatly appreciated.

    I don't wish to sound redundant here, but I've been reviewing the vendor's page:
    It's OK- I don't mind beating this dead horse....
    The maker says such to protect themselves from possible claims that may arise due to over loaded systems and power problems when their card is installed in said system.
    Of course, 300w would be nice, but they didn't even specify the PSU rating a couple years ago. The Sawtooth, with it's 237w PSU, used to be listed as a compatible machine for the 9800...... They just didn't consider how far a Sawtooth might be modded.
    Within reason, the early G4's (Sawtooths) are capable of using the Radeon 9800 Pro. The GE has the same 338w PSU as the DA (they are interchangeable), so there is plenty of power for the 9800.
    One thing to remember, the requirements of the ADC port of the AGP slot are removed by using a non ADC card. This really changes the calculations of the power available.
    It's kinda' a long post, but, if you care to get ALL the details, check the following:
    http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=7065653&#7065653
    I think you'll be satisfied with the explanation.......
    Which leaves your second, and very appropriate, point.
    The main enemy of all, though, isn't power. Heat is the biggest concern.
    Reducing heat/increasing cooling by using a third party fan on the 9800 is highly recommended. The 9800 is a hot card, and the stock fan is prone to early failure.
    Adding additional cooling to remove the extra heat produced by the 9800, by using an exausting PCI fan, will also help the PSU provide adequate voltage to the system, by reducing the amount of hot air moving out of the PSU.
    Super heated air moving through the PSU reduces the cooling ability of the PSU. A hot PSU doesn't produce reliable power.
    So, add the 9800, add some cooling, and enjoy!

  • How to tell if my netbook has gigabit Ethernet (and/or can use it)

    I have owned an Asus Eee 701SD (the 8GB version) since 2009, and installed Arch on it last summer (a great move :-) ).
    The other day, I came across a page on the FreeBSD wiki, which suggested that certain 700-series Eee's have a gigabit Ethernet interface (rather than the usual 10/100). Through checking 'hardinfo' and 'sudo lshw -c network', it appears that my machine might have a gigabit interface, but I'm not sure. This is the output from lshw:
    *-network
    description: Ethernet interface
    product: AR8121/AR8113/AR8114 Gigabit or Fast Ethernet
    vendor: Atheros Communications
    physical id: 0
    bus info: pci@0000:03:00.0
    logical name: eth0
    version: b0
    serial: 00:24:8c:3f:3a:ba
    capacity: 100Mbit/s
    width: 64 bits
    clock: 33MHz
    capabilities: pm msi pciexpress vpd bus_master cap_list ethernet physical tp 10bt 10bt-fd 100bt 100bt-fd autonegotiation
    configuration: autonegotiation=on broadcast=yes driver=ATL1E driverversion=1.0.0.7-NAPI firmware=L1e latency=0 link=no multicast=yes port=twisted pair
    resources: irq:44 memory:fbfc0000-fbffffff ioport:ec00(size=128)
    This is a bit confusing - the "capacity" heading above indicates the Ethernet is 10/100, but the Atheros Ethernet interface is given as "AR8121/AR8113/AR8114 Gigabit or Fast Ethernet" (confirmed by 'lspci'), which I guess means it can act as either gigabit or 10/100.
    Assuming that all this means I do have a gigabit Ethernet port on my netbook: will the Arch system make automatic use of the extra speed, or do I need to issue any commands, change any settings, recompile the kernel, etc.?
    Many thanks :-)
    Tim

    If it were a Gigabit NIC, it would simply be "AR8121/AR8113/AR8114 Gigabit"
    Seriously, if the driver is working properly, 100Mbit/s is what you have got.  You can check again with
    ethtool eth0
    which lists the supported device speeds.
    Last edited by lolilolicon (2012-01-12 11:21:30)

Maybe you are looking for