NETWORK PRESENCE ABOUT SERVICES PRODUCTS TRAINING CONTACT US SEARCH SUPPORT
 


Search
display results
words begin  exact words  any words part 

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [FW1] choice bw nt or linux



But if you compared apples to apples and had a Nokia box with dual Xeon
processors it would most likely kick Linux's butt. The performance figures
on CPs web site show the IP650 with SINGLE PIII 700 and 256MB pushing
240Mbps.

Just my two pence worth.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Trudeau" <[email protected]>
To: "Brett Lymn" <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2000 12:19 PM
Subject: Re: [FW1] choice bw nt or linux


>
> As I was then...
>
> I did not actually SEE the results, although I would very much like to be
involved
> in the benchmarking of the different solutions.  I definitively HAVE seen
postings
> and otherwise indicating that a comparable Solaris Solution (processor
etc) was
> used int he test and was beaten by some crazy percentage...
>
> Nokia boxes were also tested in the same benchmark and were also beaten.
I can
> easily go out and find a redundant power supply 19" rack mountable Intel
based
> hardware solution for about $4500, install RH 6.X and Checkpoint on the
box and it
> will beat an Existing Nokia platform in most tests...
>
> I agree that the Linux Stack has a way to go to be as efficient, but $4500
for a
> linux solution which does in fact SMOKE a $30,000 Nokia solution is a nice
price
> point for a lot of people.
>
> The point I suppose I SHOULD have made is the "bang-for-the-buck" one.
The linux
> solution far and away provides more bang for the buck than ANY of the
other
> solutions.
>
> CT
>
> Brett Lymn wrote:
>
> > According to Chris Trudeau:
> > >
> > >
> > >and IMHO the reports I hear is that a tuned linux kernel running
Checkpoi=
> > >nt SMOKES
> > >the competition, including Nokia, and ANYTHIN on NT...
> >
> > Uhhhh ``I doubt it'' the processor in the linux box used in the
> > testing may have been a lot faster than the processor in the Nokia
> > giving you an inflated figure.  The linux tcp/ip stack still has a way
> > to go in terms of performance, I am reasonably certain that it beats
> > the NT implementation but as for beating the BSD IP stack... I think
not.
> >
> > >May be spoiled, but=
> > > routing
> > >issues are normally easier to troublshoot as is remote management of
the =
> > >OS and many
> > >other factors when one uses a linux or *nix mased solution.
> > >
> >
> > secure, remote access is something the *nix solutions do do better
> > than NT.
> >
> > >And in this case it is supposedly so much faster too...
> > >
> >
> > I would crank up the salt mine on that one.
> >
> > --
> >
============================================================================
===
> > Brett Lymn, Computer Systems Administrator, BAE SYSTEMS
> >
============================================================================
===
>
>
>
>
============================================================================
====
>      To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please see the instructions at
>                http://www.checkpoint.com/services/mailing.html
>
============================================================================
====
>



================================================================================
     To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please see the instructions at
               http://www.checkpoint.com/services/mailing.html
================================================================================



 
----------------------------------

ABOUT SERVICES PRODUCTS TRAINING CONTACT US SEARCH SUPPORT SITE MAP LEGAL
   All contents � 2003 Network Presence, LLC. All rights reserved.