cpu load - pci v usb modems

How much load on the cpu will a pci modem save compared to a usb one
(eg if running on a creaky old P2-400 under win98)
--
robert w hall

"robert w hall" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> How much load on the cpu will a pci modem save compared to a usb one
> (eg if running on a creaky old P2-400 under win98)

USB on Win98 will be flakey at best, go with the pci and save yourself a LOT
of hassle.

P.

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, PJB <(E-Mail Removed)>
writes
>
>"robert w hall" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> How much load on the cpu will a pci modem save compared to a usb one
>> (eg if running on a creaky old P2-400 under win98)
>
>USB on Win98 will be flakey at best, go with the pci and save yourself a LOT
>of hassle.
>
>P.
>
>
Yes I don't think the problem was flakeyness, more like sluggishness.

Do the pci boards (like the bewan unit from aria that got plugged
recently) do more 'on chip' than the usb ones or not? (I though I'd read
usb were essentially 'winmodem'-like in their cpu utilisation).
--
robert w hall

> Do the pci boards (like the bewan unit from aria that got plugged
> recently) do more 'on chip' than the usb ones or not? (I though I'd read
> usb were essentially 'winmodem'-like in their cpu utilisation).

Why not just buy a router and save all the hassle ?

Dave

--

Some people use windows, others have a life.

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 23:24:17 +0000, robert w hall wrote:

> Do the pci boards (like the bewan unit from aria that got plugged
> recently) do more 'on chip' than the usb ones or not? (I though I'd read
> usb were essentially 'winmodem'-like in their cpu utilisation).

i doubt the pci modems do anything much more than usb ones do. but,
theoretically, a pci modem ought to be a little bit less load on the
processor because there's one less layer of protocols to be worked through
in communicating with it - i.e., usb.

generally, i think, the usb connection will be to the motherboard's pci
bridge, which is then connected to the processor etc. with a pci modem,
you're saving the system from having to do whatever bits and pieces it has
to do to communicate with a usb device.

i'd guess, though, that it probably wouldn't make a noticeable difference
to the overall speed of the computer as observed by a user. that's
specially true when it comes to web browsing - the speed of which is
really determined by how fast the system can render graphics, which is
dependent on how much RAM there is, more than anything else.

will

On 01 Nov 2004 in uk.telecom.broadband, Dave Stanton wrote:

>Why not just buy a router and save all the hassle ?

A week ago you could get a PCI card for under a tenner (plus VAT and P+P)
which is quite a bit lower than most routers, even single port... Peter.

--
PlusNet <http://tinyurl.com/24ymz> - I recommend them and save some cash.

On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 04:39:35 +0000, Peter M wrote:

> On 01 Nov 2004 in uk.telecom.broadband, Dave Stanton wrote:
>
>>Why not just buy a router and save all the hassle ?
>
> A week ago you could get a PCI card for under a tenner (plus VAT and P+P)
> which is quite a bit lower than most routers, even single port... Peter.

Lot more advantages to routers. Still you pays your money etc....

Dave

--

Some people use windows, others have a life.

In article <(E-Mail Removed) >, will kemp
<(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 23:24:17 +0000, robert w hall wrote:
>
>> Do the pci boards (like the bewan unit from aria that got plugged
>> recently) do more 'on chip' than the usb ones or not? (I though I'd read
>> usb were essentially 'winmodem'-like in their cpu utilisation).
>
>i doubt the pci modems do anything much more than usb ones do. but,
>theoretically, a pci modem ought to be a little bit less load on the
>processor because there's one less layer of protocols to be worked through
>in communicating with it - i.e., usb.
>
>generally, i think, the usb connection will be to the motherboard's pci
>bridge, which is then connected to the processor etc. with a pci modem,
>you're saving the system from having to do whatever bits and pieces it has
>to do to communicate with a usb device.
>
>i'd guess, though, that it probably wouldn't make a noticeable difference
>to the overall speed of the computer as observed by a user. that's
>specially true when it comes to web browsing - the speed of which is
>really determined by how fast the system can render graphics, which is
>dependent on how much RAM there is, more than anything else.
>
>will
>
will
thanks for this, which was the sort of feedback I was after.
Putting aside the graphics rendering issue, I thought we'd been informed
that a usb adsl modem could load the cpu up by 20 to 30%? And that part
of the reason was that all the adsl 'layers' had to be done by the cpu.

Looking quickly at the (linux-version of the) Bewan drivers, the usb and
pci ones look rather similar in size, so I began to suspect that the pci
units also handled all layers by cpu... but was rather hoping on some
expert confirmation (yours is the best so far - thanks).


--
robert w hall

On 01 Nov 2004, in uk.telecom.broadband, Dave Stanton wrote:

>Lot more advantages to routers. Still you pays your money etc....

I have two here, but the poster doesn't see the need so why force it on him.
It might, of course, just be because he's using the box as a firewall and
does not want to have two ethernet cards in it, plus cost of the router.


--
PlusNet <http://tinyurl.com/24ymz> - I recommend them and save some cash.

robert w hall wrote:

> thanks for this, which was the sort of feedback I was after.
> Putting aside the graphics rendering issue, I thought we'd been informed
> that a usb adsl modem could load the cpu up by 20 to 30%? And that part
> of the reason was that all the adsl 'layers' had to be done by the cpu.
>
> Looking quickly at the (linux-version of the) Bewan drivers, the usb and
> pci ones look rather similar in size, so I began to suspect that the pci
> units also handled all layers by cpu... but was rather hoping on some
> expert confirmation (yours is the best so far - thanks).
>
>
I assume you have your reasons for rejecting the idea of an external
ethernet connected ADSL modem/router? It would remove most of the CPU
load issues, and simplify setup as well. These days the basic ones
seem to start at around 40 quid - not that much more than a basic modem.
--
Alex Monro, Exeter, UK The good thing about being a pessimist
alexm at pobox dot com (No HTML) is that you have more chance of a
Running on GNU/Linux (SuSE 8.2) pleasant surprise.
GPG key 68F8 6270 available from hkp://blackhole.pca.dfn.de