Thanks Euan. Note that the pps number really should be doubles because it was bidirectional traffic. IIRC it was 64 byte packets.
So the G1 showed some dropped frames at 800kpps and the G2 showed some drops at 1.5Mpps. This was a quick test we did to simply compare the CPU numbers with the load increase. Rodney On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 02:26:03PM +0100, Euan Galloway wrote: > On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 08:49:53AM -0400, Rodney Dunn wrote: > > Here is a rough spreadsheet with the numbers we had done. > > For the attachment challenged amoungst us... > > (excuse the bad reformatting). > (CPU) (CPU) > Pps NPE-G1 NPE-G2 > each direction > > 100,000 31% 49% > 125,000 37% 51% > 150,000 44% 55% > 175,000 53% 58% > 200,000 61% 60% > 225,000 67% 61% > 250,000 75% 63% > 275,000 84% 65% > 300,000 90% 68% > 325,000 98% 70% > 350,000 100% 73% > 375,000 100% 75% > 400,000 dropped packets 400,000 pps 78% > 425,000 81% > 450,000 83% > 475,000 86% > 500,000 88% > 525,000 91% > 550,000 94% > 575,000 95% > 600,000 97% > 625,000 98% > 650,000 99% > 675,000 99% > 700,000 99% > 725,000 99% > 750,000 dropped packets at 750,000 pps > > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
