Re: Also seeing 2 x quad-core system slower that 2 x dual core
- From: Gavin Atkinson <gavin.atkinson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 15:20:36 +0000
On Fri, 2007-11-30 at 09:44 -0500, Jim Pingle wrote:
This may be a silly question, but have you tried reducing the RAM on the
quad core machine to 4GB so the machines match in that respect as well?
I seem to recall a thread a while back about someone who had slowdowns in a
certain situation with large amounts of RAM (>4GB).
This was with the Intel 965 chipset, and was fixed with a BIOS upgrade,
something to do with the way the BIOS set cache info up about memory
above 4Gb. A BIOS upgrade may be worth trying.
Removing memory from the slow one toleave it with 4Gb may be a useful
datapoint. Note that I don't think you can just set hw.maxmem as that
makes no guarantee as to *whicch* physical 4Gb will get used.
Finally, I assume you are using FreeBSD amd64 and not i386 in PAE mode?
Posting dmesg outputs from both systems somewhere might be useful, I
can't see it in the previous posts.
Gavin
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"
- References:
- Re: Also seeing 2 x quad-core system slower that 2 x dual core
- From: Pete French
- Re: Also seeing 2 x quad-core system slower that 2 x dual core
- From: Jim Pingle
- Re: Also seeing 2 x quad-core system slower that 2 x dual core
- Prev by Date: Re: Also seeing 2 x quad-core system slower that 2 x dual core
- Next by Date: Re: Also seeing 2 x quad-core system slower that 2 x dual core
- Previous by thread: Re: Also seeing 2 x quad-core system slower that 2 x dual core
- Next by thread: Re: Also seeing 2 x quad-core system slower that 2 x dual core
- Index(es):