Ethernet Performance

We have often talked about the throughput advantage of PCI Express compared to PCI and its impact on Gigabit LAN performance. To show you this, the new motherboard test suite includes LAN performance measurements.

The Windows 2000 Driver Development Kit (DDK) includes a useful LAN testing utility called NTttcp. We used the NTttcp tool to test Ethernet throughput and the CPU utilization of the various Ethernet Controllers used on the nForce4 Ultra motherboards.

We set up one machine as the server; in this case, an Intel box with an Intel CSA Gigabit LAN connection. Intel CSA has a reputation for providing fast throughput and this seemed a reasonable choice to serve our Gigabit LAN clients. At the server side, we used the following Command Line as suggested by the VIA whitepaper on LAN testing:
Nttcps - m 4,0, -a 4 - l 256000 - n 30000
On the client side (the motherboard under test), we used the following Command Line:
Nttcpr - m 4,0, -a 4 - l 256000 - n 30000
At the conclusion of the test, we captured the throughput and CPU utilization figures from the client screen.

Ethernet Throughput

Ethernet Overhead

While Marvel PCI has a bit lower overhead, the throughput for Gigabit LAN on PCI is almost 30% lower than Gigabit on PCI Express. The NVIDIA on-chip PCIe LAN also exhibits lower CPU utilization than the full Gigabit LAN on PCIe. It has also been reported that enabling NVIDIA Active Armor lowers CPU overhead even further.

All Ethernet tests were performed with standard frames, but Gigabit Ethernet supports Jumbo frames as well. Jumbo frames will theoretically provide a further reduction in CPU overhead. We have seen test results that show the combination of Active Armor and Jumbo Frames can reduce CPU utilization below 10%, which is very respectable performance for on-chip gigabit LAN.

Firewire and USB Performance Audio Performance
Comments Locked

75 Comments

View All Comments

  • lsman - Tuesday, July 5, 2005 - link

    yet, "As you can see, none of the onboard audio solutions were quite as low in CPU utilization as the Creative SoundBlaster Live! Chip, which is used on the MSI K8N Neo4 Platinum."
    so creative on board is a reference? because you do not test the MSI K8N Neo4 platium.
  • Wesley Fink - Tuesday, July 5, 2005 - link

    #2 -
    As we said several times in the roundup, we reviewed the MSI and Asus in the SLI roundup. The SLI and Ultra chipsets are exactly the same chipset with SLI enabled on the SLI chipset. We did not see what new information we could bring you by reviewing the Ultra versions fo the same boards. As you can see in the benchmarks in this roundup the DFI perfoms in Ultra exactly as it did in SLI.

    The MSI was an Editor's Choice in the SLI roundup and is a similar good choice as an Ultra board. There have been some issues with the Venice and San Diego overclocking and MSI has finally released a new BIOS to address these problems.

    The Asus was not a particularly good overclocker in the SLI roundup, and not an Editors Choice, but it was a decent performer at stock speeds.


  • Djinni - Tuesday, July 5, 2005 - link

    Very good work, but I too would of liked to see the MSI K8N Neo4 Platinum in there since thats what I just bought yesterday :P
  • MaxisOne - Tuesday, July 5, 2005 - link

    Nice .. but partially useless considering the Asus A8N-E and MSI offerings are missing from the lineup which is what im looking to compare to the DFI Ultra D
  • ChrisSwede - Tuesday, July 5, 2005 - link

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now