On Thu, 2009-10-15 at 22:09 -0600, Travis Johnson wrote:
> In our bench testing, the RB1000 actually performs very well. You
> can't just compare CPU's (as I'm sure you know). The RB1000 was
> designed from the ground up to move packets. The Atom CPU was designed
> as an inexpensive computer system.

Yes, the RB1k IS a very fast packet processor for the money, but I'd be
surprised if it could keep up with that dual core.  Maybe it could.
I've been wrong before, and the Atom is one platform I've never even
seen firsthand.

> I think I have a dual-core 1.6ghz Atom board and CPU (Intel brand of
> both) and an RB1000. I can run some performance tests... what do you
> want to see?

Don't go to that trouble on MY account.  If it is of interest to you (or
others on the list), then by all means do so.  I'd recommend some
bandwidth tests with very small packets to see how many it can process
in routed mode.  Try the same tests with large packets.  Also,
throughput with large and small packets when NAT is active.

-- 
********************************************************************
* Butch Evans                   * Professional Network Consultation*
* http://www.butchevans.com/    * Network Engineering              *
* http://www.wispa.org/         * Wired or Wireless Networks       *
* http://blog.butchevans.com/   * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE!  *
********************************************************************



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Reply via email to