Your variance could also be because of the Numeric Co-Processor. This was an option on the 9x7 and may not be installed on every machine. Rgds Mel On Tue, 15 Aug 2000 16:04:34 -0500 (Central Daylight Time), "HOFMEISTER,JAMES (HP-USA,ex1)" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >Hello Bob, > >Re: TCP Checksum performance > >Thanks for this feed back on the 937SX and 917LX. I am a HP guy >and should know this, but my true love is MPE networking (don't >tell my wife) and with the huge number of CPU, DISK, PRINTERS, >etc. that are found on the 3000 the numbers after a while they >all just blur together, or it could just be my short term memory >lost (me not the 3000). Actually it must be the serious lack of >memory in my 917LX that makes it so slow, it has always run like >a dog for me... which is not a bad thing since I do a bunch of >resource testing between fast and slow machines and when I need >a slow destination machine I know where to look. > >I found the URL: > > http://raven.utc.edu/cgi-bin/WA.EXE?A2=ind9502B&L=hp3000-l&P=R7835 > > Perf. >CPU Rating >917LX 10.0 >... >937 10.0 >... >967 20.0 >... > >I did not find a ranking for my 959/200. > >Thanks for the info, and as I warned YMWV - Your Mileage Will Vary. > >Regards, > >James Hofmeister >Hewlett Packard >Worldwide Technology Network Expert Center >P.S. My Ideals are my own, not necessarily my employers. > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Bob J. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] >Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2000 15:09 >To: HOFMEISTER,JAMES (HP-USA,ex1) >Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] TCP Checksum performance > > >James, > The measurements are interesting but FYI a 937SX is not a faster >machine than a 917LX. The only differences between the 917, 927, >937, 947, LX, RX, and SX are licensing and numbers of I/O slots and >internal peripheral space with the required power supply(ies) to >support the load. They all run at exactly the same processor speed. If >you >want verification check a service manual or ask a CE. > I'm going to turn my checksumming ON. From the info you provided it >sure seems worth the tiny performance degradation. > > Thanx for the info. > > Bob J. -- Ideal Computer Services > > > >"> >> The finding is on my low end 917LX is that data-transfer performance >> with TCP checksum enabled was significantly slower in the range of 7-8 >> percent slower, but the CPU impact was only in the range of 2-3 percent >> higher overhead. >> >> My finding on my next fastest machine a 937SX is >