megatron-uk wrote on 2021-04-16, 08:45:

If you consider the relatively modern terminology of using base-10, yes, but the traditional computing science units that I was […]
Show full quote

Doornkaat wrote on 2021-04-16, 08:00:

I'm getting more confused. Asking those who are more knowledgeable if my understanding of the terminology is correct: kilobyte = […]
Show full quote

I'm getting more confused.
Asking those who are more knowledgeable if my understanding of the terminology is correct:
kilobyte = kB (or kByte)
kilobit = kb (or kbit)
megabyte = MB (or MByte)
megabit = Mb (or Mbit)

1 megabyte = 1000 kilobyte = 8 megabit = 8000 kilobit
1 megabit = 1000 kilobit = 0,125 megabyte = 125 kilobyte

If you consider the relatively modern terminology of using base-10, yes, but the traditional computing science units that I was taught some 30 years ago are:

1 Megabyte = 1024 Kilobytes

The use of base-10, rather than base-8 numbers is a relatively new concept - you'll see some references to SI-sounding unit names like kibibit and kibibyte and mebibit and mebibyte. These terms didn't exist when most of us oldies were going through school/college/university.

It's why your 2TB hard drive is actually 1.85TB in reality - disk drive manufacturers always use the base-10 version to make it seem larger.

That's why gigabit (1000 megabit) ethernet has a maximum transfer rate of ~125 megabytes/sec (1000 / 8 = 125).

Oh yes, I knew about this. It doesn't help my general confusion about the units that the kibi- is abbreviated with a capital K ("Kibit"). 😅

Doornkaat wrote on 2021-04-16, 07:07:

I'm reading this as 4MByte/s, right?

yes

Oetker wrote on 2021-04-16, 08:00:

Sphere478 wrote on 2021-04-16, 06:16:

sitting around 4 mb/sec with intel pro gt and killer nic. the killer seems to be a few tenths of a mb/sec faster though

So the realtek was faster for you?

it appears so but that doesn't sound right. I need to re run the test and be sure all contributing factors are the same.

I'll post a confirmation if I do re run the test.

I'm surprised you are not able to achieve the full bandwidth of a fast ethernet connection on a Pentium 133.

What is your testing routine?

@megatron-uk, that's wrong today. There are different SI prefixes for base-10 and base-2 units.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_prefix

Kilo- is always 1000, Mega- is always 1 000 000, etc.

This standard exists since 1998, so already over 2 decades.

One of the biggest rule-braker today is Windows operating system, that shows 2-based numbers, yet puts 10-based units behind that number.

GigAHerZ wrote on 2021-04-21, 07:15:

@megatron-uk, that's wrong today. There are different SI prefixes for base-10 and base-2 units. […]
Show full quote

@megatron-uk, that's wrong today. There are different SI prefixes for base-10 and base-2 units.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_prefix

Kilo- is always 1000, Mega- is always 1 000 000, etc.

This standard exists since 1998, so already over 2 decades.

One of the biggest rule-braker today is Windows operating system, that shows 2-based numbers, yet puts 10-based units behind that number.

I know 😀

30 years ago, that wasn't what we were taught. As far as I'm concerned, my Computer Science degree was in units that predate the renaming of those prefixes, and I'll continue using them until I die 😁

@megatron, i assume you will not touch any programming languages beside basic and fortran, either. 😀
Btw, this forum is using UTF-8 charset, which also didn't exist back then, so i believe you've forced your browser to ASCII encoding, right?
And by all means, no more than 8 bits for datapaths!

What i want to say is that world is advancing and it's more advantageous to adapt to it, than to be a "dinosaur".

GigAHerZ wrote on 2021-04-21, 08:10:

What i want to say is that world is advancing and it's more advantageous to adapt to it, than to be a "dinosaur".

Nope, that's me: dinosaur.

Well, my kids would have me believe it.

megatron-uk wrote on 2021-04-21, 07:10:

I'm surprised you are not able to achieve the full bandwidth of a fast ethernet connection on a Pentium 133.

What is your testing routine?

dual pentium mmx 233

speed measured by second windows 10 modern computer over the network copying large file to dual pentium

I suspect you would get a truer representative of the throughput if the cards if you used iperf or similar.

When you say "large" files... 1mb, 10? 100?

You also need to run the test in both directions, otherwise you are limiting your test to how fast the IO subsystem can write the data to disk. Running it the other way should at least shoe you if you are disk write/read limited as well as or instead of NIC limited.

Just my 2p/2c or whatever, but a dual 233 should be able to saturate a fast ethernet link. You've got a bottleneck somewhere, or your cards/switch or whatever are operating in half duplex mode.

the network wasn't cooperating when I tried it which is it's usual state actually. I think i could only see the shared folder from the windows 10 computer. that or the windows xp computer didn't show mb/sec

iperf?

one of these days I may try the test again. busy with other stuff.