So, it's been benchmarked here before that the AsanteFAST 10/100 Ethernet card...just isn't too fast. Unsurprisingly older OT just can't push very quick anyway, and so the returns are really diminished.
68kmla.org
Curiously though, looking at photos on Bitsavers, I realized there's a difference between that card and the Farallon "EtherFast":
The AsanteFAST uses an SMSC LAN91C100, while the Farallon uses a LAN91C100FD. What's that mean? The LAN91C100FD properly supports full duplex transfers.
Note that I'm not sure the Farallon is really an "EtherFast" at all...perhaps this was a Fast EtherTX 10/100? Farallon has it pegged at 20MBps "bus performance" which is kinda corny...guess they didn't even support NuBus 90!: https://web.archive.org/web/19980524081443/http://www.farallon.com/product/fen/fecards.html
Has anyone ever compared the two? I wonder if the Farallon wins...
68K/early PPC with onboard AAUI 100mbps ethernet?
I learned a lot from this thread, but it looks like nobody ever posted test results... I have some here for those still curious: Test file: Mac OS 9.2.1 Update.smi (84.4MB / 86,018,641 bytes) Switch: TrendNET TEG-S24g Gigabit Server: Power Macintosh 9600/1000(G4 [2MB Cache on board]) Apple...
68kmla.org
Curiously though, looking at photos on Bitsavers, I realized there's a difference between that card and the Farallon "EtherFast":
The AsanteFAST uses an SMSC LAN91C100, while the Farallon uses a LAN91C100FD. What's that mean? The LAN91C100FD properly supports full duplex transfers.
Note that I'm not sure the Farallon is really an "EtherFast" at all...perhaps this was a Fast EtherTX 10/100? Farallon has it pegged at 20MBps "bus performance" which is kinda corny...guess they didn't even support NuBus 90!: https://web.archive.org/web/19980524081443/http://www.farallon.com/product/fen/fecards.html
Has anyone ever compared the two? I wonder if the Farallon wins...



